HDMI cable? and upscaling dvd

weegie.geek

aliEnRIK wrote: »

My friend had no cables of any kind so I supplied condtioner, 2 mains and a hdmi (For the dvd player). So it was ALL those collectively (But the conditioner and the mains that made his inbuilt freeview look far better)
The hdmi case as i've explained (somewhere ~ im getting a bit lost ) is one of simply trying 3 different ones out and the 2 dearer ones looked quite a bit more sharper and 3 dimensional than the qed one (which is still VERY good by the way and I highly recommend to anyone willing to spend 50 quid on one (Cheaper on ebay))

He went from no cables to having cables, and it made the picture better?

That kind of logic I can't argue with.

TorrestheGreat

Marty_J wrote: »

Check this out:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000I1X6PM/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Make sure you read the comments, I had no idea Amazon was so amusing!

LOL those comments are absolutely hysterical! If you havent done so, go and read a few!

aliEnRIK

weegie.geek wrote: »

He went from no cables to having cables, and it made the picture better?

That kind of logic I can't argue with.

Ok ~ he had the free ones that came with his system, sorry Mr Pedantic

aliEnRIK

TorrestheGreat wrote: »

LOL those comments are absolutely hysterical! If you havent done so, go and read a few!

This ones classic ~

While the production quality of this cable, along with the little arrows that help me(and the music) understand where the sound is going, is mind-boggling - What I found most impressive is that this cable actually turned my binary digital audio devices into TRINARY digital audio devices. All the people saying that it's just 1's and 0's don't understand how revolutionary this cable is. IT UPSCALES YOUR DIGITAL SPECTRUM TO ALLOW FOR 2's!!! Any true audiophile knows that 2's are where the upper-order harmonicas are to be found in high quality digital audio. :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

aliEnRIK

oooooo

Looky what I found on HDMI cables

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/whats-the-matter-with-hdmi.htm

aliEnRIK

and heres the genuine HDMI specs

http://www.hdmi.org/pdf/HDMISpecInformationalVersion.pdf

and these guys talking about it ~

http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/67909965/m/450005880831?r=488004880831

theres tons of stuff in here but if I have this right the reason more expensive hdmis do actually outperform the lesser ones is in fact what one of the guys said early in the thread. That its down to bandwidth and basically whats happening is that the information being thrown down the hdmi (especially in 1080) at great speed is simply too much for the cables and does in fact end up with errors in the signal. This also answers the question as to why firewires and usb cables on computers dont have errors, they are simply not being FORCED through and so there are no errors as its all done within the constraints of the cable being used.

weegie.geek

Post #6 in this thread, which I posted many many months ago, links to a comparison of the bandwidth capabilities of lots of cables.

It was, iirc, generally accepted that at 720p you could more or less use the cheapest thing you can find, at pretty much any length, and it'd work fine.

At the considerably higher bandwidth rates necessary for 1080p, with longer cables, cable quality does make a difference, and you'll get signal loss. Picture breakups,
pixelation loss of audio, etc. Not colour bleeding, which is physically impossible.

Which is what we've been saying all the time.

The data is 1s and 0s. It's sent over HDMI with checksums. If the checksum is wrong at the other end, and whatever error compensation is built into the protocols HDMI cables use can't reconstruct the data, the picture/audio will break up, in a way not unlike if a DVD is scratched, or if you're getting a bad signal via sky or freeview.

It's not physically possible for the picture or audio to become less three-dimensional, or whatever fuzzy term you want to use.

It's not that expensive cables outperform cheaper ones. Better quality cables outperform worse quality ones, and good quality cheap ones will perform identically to good quality expensive ones.

Digital cable specifications say how much signal strength loss is allowed per metre, how much crosstalk is allowed, etc.

As long as your cable is compliant with the specification, it's suitable. If it's compliant, it'll perform no better or worse than any other spec-compliant cable.

The HDMI spec has been updated a few times to include support for greater bandwidth (for 1080p and above, different audio types etc), different physical connectors for portable devices, and to include automating audio/video syncing, among other things.

a 10 metre cheapo cable that meets the HDMI 1.3b spec will give exactly the same picture and sound quality as a 10 metre Monster/other sense>money cable, when used on the same equipment.

It's just a fact. I know you like to think of yourself as an AV enthusiast, but it's a complete waste of your money to buy high-end digital cabling.

aliEnRIK

Did you bother to READ the posts I posted Geek?

out of sheer intrigue Geek. If you stood here with me and it was CLEAR that there was a difference in quality between the cables, would you agree that there was or just tell me NO as thats the sort of person you are?
720P, 1080I and 1080P could easily ALL have exactly the same 'bitrate'. All dvds and blurays are compressed and its down to the bitrate of that particluar scene thats showing at the time. Which basically means that a faster scene would need more bits so you dont get that horrible BLOCKING effect. On the downside more bits means more possible errors in the hdmi.
On top of that 720P is sending the FULL picture down each frame whilst 1080i only sends half down so in 'some' cases 720p will actually be sending more information down the hdmi than 1080i (1080P sends double that of 1080i and is therefore the most likely to have errors in the signal)
Also, any dvd players worth their salt now UPSCALE which means ANY dvd would be over and above what the specs of the cable can take (One or more of the websites above specifically say that due to the constraints of the hmdi spec that even the 'latest' cables do NOT allow ALL information down the line)
On that note its down to quite a few varying factors but my Pioneer definitely looks better upscaled to 1080i than 720P. Other tvs might look better with 720P though.

aliEnRIK

weegie.geek wrote: »

Post #6 in this thread, which I posted many many months ago, links to a comparison of the bandwidth capabilities of lots of cables.


Not colour bleeding, which is physically impossible.

Which is what we've been saying all the time.

The data is 1s and 0s. It's sent over HDMI with checksums. If the checksum is wrong at the other end, and whatever error compensation is built into the protocols HDMI cables use can't reconstruct the data, the picture/audio will break up, in a way not unlike if a DVD is scratched, or if you're getting a bad signal via sky or freeview.

It's not physically possible for the picture or audio to become less three-dimensional, or whatever fuzzy term you want to use.

Digital cable specifications say how much signal strength loss is allowed per metre, how much crosstalk is allowed, etc.

As long as your cable is compliant with the specification, it's suitable. If it's compliant, it'll perform no better or worse than any other spec-compliant cable.

.

Fair play that you posted that but I got to page 50 and gave up after that (Page 50 from last posts on this forum). I accept that the 'bleeding' term isnt really possible I was trying to put it into lament terms as to the difference on screen. And the 3 dimensionality IS correct as when theres errors on screen then the picture just isnt as sharp (Particularly when theres supposed to be a LOT of detail on screen. I use Walking With Dinosaurs as a test disc as I know certain sections inside out now which is what 'I' use for initial comapisons and certain sections showing land will show up differences in cable quality (or if thats what you REALLY dont want me to say then the theres a DIFFERENCE OF THE PICTURE ON MY SCREEN when using different cables)

But basically im glad youve posted as you now agree that (dependant on whats being shown) some information that starts at the dvd end will NOT make it to the screen end of a hdmi the same

Marty_J

I don't think anyone is disputing that a digital signal can be corrupted. The point is, that when it is corrupted, it doesn't work.

Take a set of car keys to your Walking With Dinosaurs DVD and go to town on it. Then try and play it. The result won't simply lack warmth or be less vibrant or less three dimensional.

The coaster your DVD has now became is what happens when a digital signal is corrupted. The same is true if it's corrupted during transmission.

Surely you've seen what happens to a digital TV picture when there's interference?