What HDMI cable???

Dave101t

-Ad- wrote: »

:wall:

Gold will do nothing to the picture quality, please read my above post and read the audioholics article to educate yourself a bit more on the format.

i did say quality of the cable, not the image.....
educate yourself of proof-reading! meh!

also, it seems from the mixed responses that we have all had different experiences with the cables, so maybe there isnt a difference at all, maybe its perceptual only?

aliEnRIK

Bikertov wrote: »

Ethernet cables are twisted together to reduce crosstalk. They are also Unsheilded / Unscreened (Hence 'UTP' - Unsheilded Twisted Pair). This is because of the very high bandwith (Gigabit and more now) running over long distances (CAT5/6 etc can run up to 100m) the signal would degrade to the point that the receivers would not be able to distinguish between 1's and 0's clearly, and the Error Correction would not be able to fill in sufficient gaps..

If you only had to run ethernet over 2m as well, then you could get away with almost any cable - untwisted, wet string etc.

Not quite the same as a 2m HDMI cable then ...


.

Not the best reference I know (This has nothing to do with the links ill post)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twisted_pair

"are twisted together for the purposes of canceling out electromagnetic interference (EMI) from external sources; for instance, electromagnetic radiation from Unshielded Twisted Pair (UTP) cables"

INT1

Don't buy any HDMI cables from Curry's/Dixons. They are £69.99 for the Belkin Pure AV and on Amazon £7.99 for the same cable!

nitr02007

aliEnRIK wrote: »

I lose interest as people come up spouting the same old cr*p time and time again without REALLY knowing what theyre talking about

:THahaha -you said it.:T Either put up the evidence or shut up.:rotfl:

I lose interest with people SAY they who have the evidence somewhere but never produce it.

Bullsh*t - the only evidence you have is from What Hi-Fi who are in bed with cable makers.

aliEnRIK

nitr02007 wrote: »

:THahaha -you said it.:T Either put up the evidence or shut up.:rotfl:

I lose interest with people SAY they who have the evidence somewhere but never produce it.

Bullsh*t - the only evidence you have is from What Hi-Fi who are in bed with cable makers.

I cant get to my bookmarks from here

Rest assured when I do that they are all genuine links to proper tests
One shows a reduction in RFI when using braided cables. And MORE of a reduction the more braids are used. Its also verified by a university professor
One shows how jitter affects the digital signal in a co ax cable and even 'directionaly'. So much so it DOES affect the DAC (Meaning any error correction had failed at that point), and its on pretty short runs using 3 different cables
Another will show how they measured errors in hdmis but couldnt see a 'significant' difference to the actual picture (snow, jumping, whatever). So the errors that ARE in the picture means one of 2 things ~ that particular pixel is the wrong colour or completely off.
None of the above have ANYTHING to do with WHF.

We'll see whos talking BS

And for the record.......this is EXACTLY why I hate posting about anything to do with cables.............

-Ad-

Something I didn't reply to yesterday but Rik just disproved his viewing tests right after posting about their apparent results.

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Ive tested a Molex, QED, Chord Silver, Wireworld Starlight and Van Den Hul Flat
My equipment goes through a very expensive mains conditoner and everything is wired up with 16 core braided mains cables to reduce RFI and EMI
On 'my' setup the molex had a 'soft' look to the picture (Compared to the others)
The QED was fine and had really god results
The other 3 were all better than the QED for very fine detail and movement
People can buy one for 3 quid and it 'work'. But it sure as hell wont be as good as a half decent one

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Say whatever you like ~ they DO make a difference and ive seen them
Your right in what you say though, they cant possibly 'improve' a picture, they can only deteriorate it

Not much else to say to be honest :rotfl:

Posting links to articles on RFI EMI etc are pointless, what are you trying to prove, that interference exists ?

kwikbreaks wrote: »

In fairness he hasn't had a chance to respond to my request yet. This forum is now showing posts immediately under the one a quote is taken from rather than in simple time sequence as it used to.

All seems to be ok for me with everything posted in time order. Setup issue possibly

aliEnRIK wrote:

I lose interest as people come up spouting the same old cr*p time and time again without REALLY knowing what theyre talking about

Agreed, thanks for the entertainment.

Dave101t wrote:

i did say quality of the cable, not the image.....
educate yourself of proof-reading! meh!

What quality will a gold plated connector give on a HDMI cable? All I can think of is pretty bling colour and oxidation protection.

[Deleted User]

They should just make the damn things optical...that'd stop all the arguments

aliEnRIK

-Ad- wrote: »

Posting links to articles on RFI EMI etc are pointless, what are you trying to prove, that interference exists ?

Are you completely clueless? RFI and EMI DOES exist (Even BT use conditioners to reduce noise on telephone lines). I never once mentioned it affects HDMI cables (It will over a long length but until now never even mentioned it)
It reduces MAINS interference which does MEASUREABLY affect equipment. I was talking about mains cables, not hdmis..........!!!!!!

aliEnRIK

ringo_24601 wrote: »

They should just make the damn things optical...that'd stop all the arguments

Not entirely, you then have problems with the optical to electrical conversion

-Ad-

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Are you completely clueless? RFI and EMI DOES exist (Even BT use conditioners to reduce noise on telephone lines). I never once mentioned it affects HDMI cables (It will over a long length but until now never even mentioned it)
It reduces MAINS interference which does MEASUREABLY affect equipment. I was talking about mains cables, not hdmis..........!!!!!!

Resorting to personal insults after misreading my post isn't called for, grow up. Trying to get this thread closed as you have been proven wrong :rolleyes:

Firstly I think you should read the thread title and get back on topic. Then read that line of mine again and you will see that I never once mentioned HDMI cables and all I said was:

Posting links to articles on RFI EMI etc are pointless, what are you trying to prove, that interference exists ?

Of course interference exists I never said otherwise, why are you suddenly heading off on a wild tangent trying to prove that EMI and RFI interference exists when we all know that anyway :rotfl: