Which HDMI cable!!!

Strider590

sillygoose wrote: »

Otherwise Curry's do a 2m Belkin for £97.99! more amazing is the reviewers who all score it highly as good value. Muppetry!

And they buy then in at less than £20 a piece..... (friend worked there)

pstones578

frankieandjonney wrote: »

I am planning on buying a full 1080p tv for my xbox 360 so have started looking for an HDMI cable.

I just glanced at Tesco's range but there is vast price difference between the cheapest and most expensive. Could anyone help me to see what makes these two below different apart from the legnth and if so is it worth getting the more expensive one??

http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.204-2508.aspx £6.48

http://direct.tesco.com/q/R.204-7072.aspx £19.55

Thanks

Get one off Ebay, cheap as chips and work just as well as the more expensive ones.

aliEnRIK

Marty_J wrote: »

Generally short cables are good. However, length won't make any difference to an HDMI cable unless it's a very long cable we're talking about. 1, 2, 5, or 10 metres won't make any difference.

Short cables look much tidier behind the TV, which is why I would use them.

Actually ~ theres a lot of hdmi cables start to fail well before 10 meters. Ive even known some fail at 2 meters

Marty_J

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Actually ~ theres a lot of hdmi cables start to fail well before 10 meters. Ive even known some fail at 2 meters

Sounds like a faulty cable more than anything else.

aliEnRIK

Marty_J wrote: »

Sounds like a faulty cable more than anything else.

Possibly, but there are PLENTY of cables that fail well before 10 meters

sillygoose

moral of the story...

If your posh enough to have a pad where you can have your 199" Plasma screen 30 foot from your Sky box - you can afford a decent cable!


For us mere mortals 2 metre is probably more than enough.

Taffybiker

The only real difference between cables is the build quality. HDMI is completely digital by design and is therefore very forgiving as far as the signals are concerned.
High quality cables have a lower resistance to maximise signal level and screen to minimise pickup from stray sources. This was essential with analogue signals but not so much with digital. The manufacturers rely on people still thinking old school.
The only time a cheaper cable is likely to be a problem is if the user frequently plugs/unplugs it from the equipment.

RobTang

Actually the HDMI spec offers a quality scaling system, so if enough bandwidth isn't avaliable over the cable, your video source will reduce the colour depth or downscale the picture.

well in theory anyway... in reality version few TVs actually support the biggest colour depth or the silly large 1600p resolution.

Lum

Taffybiker wrote: »

The only real difference between cables is the build quality. HDMI is completely digital by design and is therefore very forgiving as far as the signals are concerned.
High quality cables have a lower resistance to maximise signal level and screen to minimise pickup from stray sources. This was essential with analogue signals but not so much with digital. The manufacturers rely on people still thinking old school.
The only time a cheaper cable is likely to be a problem is if the user frequently plugs/unplugs it from the equipment.

Actually signal degradation does affect HDMI and DVI cables quite easily and they're not all that forgiving about it. It's just that they'll suddenly go from looking perfect to looking terrible with artifacts all over the place, not just a slight quality loss that only the most pretentious of audiophiles will ever notice.

The problem becomes worse when some products have poor quality transmitters or receivers in the end, and then you can sometimes correct it with a better cable. For example the PS3 when combined with certain brands of TV or Monitor has this issue.