What HDMI cable???

kwikbreaks

aliEnRIK wrote: »

I can easily point people in the direction of half decent mains cables mind

Better you don't - this is supposed to be a money saving site not one one showing people how to waste their cash on pseudoscienctific catch pennies.

There is at least a technical reason why some HDMI cables may have a higher bandwidth than others (the main argument being how good is needed and how bad are the low priced ones) but suggesting the use of a high spec mains cable can improve pictures or sound is pretty unbelievable.

-Ad-

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Completely wrong

aliEnRIK wrote: »

They fed a signal down a hdmi and there were measureable errors when it came out the other end

Pretty self explanatory really

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Clearly you dont have a clue what your talking about

NEXT...........

kwikbreaks wrote: »

Please supply a link

You have constantly rubbished others onthis thread, ignored evidence, and now totally ignored anyone asking for you to actualy PROVE what you say is true. You have done nothing other than give your opinion on something that cannot be proven to be correct because it actually isn't.

It would be more useful of you to talk about this on the What hi-fi forum. As said by a previous poster this is a money saving forum and I thought you would realise this as an experienced member here rather than trying to talk people into wasting significant sums of money on a cable which won't make any difference to their television experience!

nitr02007

aliEnRIK wrote: »

Clearly you dont have a clue what your talking about

NEXT...........

Wow - how to lose credibility on an online forum. You give no proof, just spout the same mantra that everyone knows nothing apart from you. You may not believe this but there are a lot of very well educated people on this forum.

The science against your "subjective difference" claims is undisputable - that's why you've given no proof to back up your arguements - because there is none. :rotfl:

LOL - AD - you beat me to it

kwikbreaks

-Ad- wrote: »

and now totally ignored anyone asking for you to actualy PROVE what you say is true.

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.

I'm sure many will find this confusing. A forum needs to be either flat (chronological sequence) or threaded and this one is now neither. I hope the designers see the error of their ways and chose one format or the other rather than this !!!!!!!ised confusing one.

aliEnRIK

-Ad- wrote: »

You have constantly rubbished others onthis thread, ignored evidence, and now totally ignored anyone asking for you to actualy PROVE what you say is true. You have done nothing other than give your opinion on something that cannot be proven to be correct because it actually isn't.

It would be more useful of you to talk about this on the What hi-fi forum. As said by a previous poster this is a money saving forum and I thought you would realise this as an experienced member here rather than trying to talk people into wasting significant sums of money on a cable which won't make any difference to their television experience!

Five quid, how does that work?

aliEnRIK

I cant till tonight/tomorrow/whenever I can be ar*ed. But rest assured I CAN post links to braided cables 'measureably' affecting RFI and EMI, hdmi tests (various), and digital cables being directional etc

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

aliEnRIK

nitr02007 wrote: »

Wow - how to lose credibility on an online forum. You give no proof, just spout the same mantra that everyone knows nothing apart from you. You may not believe this but there are a lot of very well educated people on this forum.

The science against your "subjective difference" claims is undisputable - that's why you've given no proof to back up your arguements - because there is none. :rotfl:

LOL - AD - you beat me to it

See above remark.

aliEnRIK

kwikbreaks wrote: »

Please supply a link because although I've been a licenced radio ham for the last 30+ years I have never in all that time seen any reference to this miracle. I guess I'll need to make sure I never use the more common stranded antenna wire as it obviously doesn't work.

At its basics, its exactly why Ethernet cables are twisted together

Ill post 'measured' links when I can

Bikertov

aliEnRIK wrote: »

At its basics, its exactly why Ethernet cables are twisted together

Ill post 'measured' links when I can

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 ...


.

kwikbreaks

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

Me too