Edumacate Me on HDMI Cables

[ikarcuaso]

I see $50+ ones in store (and not just Monster) and <$10 ones online, both appearing to offer similar features. My service provider has given us an HDMI cable with each of our HD receivers (one is a 1080p model).

I'm guessing paying that in-store premium is a blatant rip off. What's your take on these HDMI cables (in general) and which brand/type/features s/b used?

[Steve Viegas]

Buy the $10.00 ones if you can wait.

[daepp]

The cheap ones work fine. However, I am unhappy with the design - the come unplugged too easily as they only rely on friction to hold them in

[masraum]

Buy inexpensive cables, but personally, I'd go for a brand that you've at least heard of. I'm sure that many of the really cheap cables are fine, but there are probably also several brands that have crap build quality and will have ends that get loose. I went with a Belkin cable, it was $22 or something close to that from Amazon.

[TerryH]

Use the free cables provided. If there's any issues, have them provide replacements.

[legion]

I was under the impression that because HDMI cables transmit a digital signal, the relative strength or weakness of the signal does not matter. Now better cables did make a difference with an analogue signal, but there was a lot of hype over performance out there IMO.

In other words, as long as they work and stay attached, a cheap HDMI cable should be just as good as an expensive one, and expensive ones make less sense with HDMI.

[EdT82SC]

HDMI carries a digital signal. This means there is absolutely no benefit for an expensive cable. Just make sure you get an HDMI version 1.3 cable, and not some older one that someone is unloading cheap.

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by EdT82SC

HDMI carries a digital signal. This means there is absolutely no benefit for an expensive cable....

as long as they don't physically fall apart (unlikely).

What is the HDMI version 1.3 cable??

[Icemaster]

Is there any advantage to HDMI over component?

[masraum]

According to the internet
hdmi ver 1.3

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#15

Q. What’s new in the HDMI 1.3 Specification?

* Higher speed: Although all previous versions of HDMI have had more than enough bandwidth to support all current HDTV formats, including full, uncompressed 1080p signals, HDMI 1.3 increases its single-link bandwidth to 340 MHz (10.2 Gbps) to support the demands of future HD display devices, such as higher resolutions, Deep Color and high frame rates. In addition, built into the HDMI 1.3 specification is the technical foundation that will let future versions of HDMI reach significantly higher speeds.
* Deep Color: HDMI 1.3 supports 10-bit, 12-bit and 16-bit (RGB or YCbCr) color depths, up from the 8-bit depths in previous versions of the HDMI specification, for stunning rendering of over one billion colors in unprecedented detail.
* Broader color space: HDMI 1.3 adds support for “x.v.Color™” (which is the consumer name describing the IEC 61966-2-4 xvYCC color standard), which removes current color space limitations and enables the display of any color viewable by the human eye.
* New mini connector: With small portable devices such as HD camcorders and still cameras demanding seamless connectivity to HDTVs, HDMI 1.3 offers a new, smaller form factor connector option.
* Lip Sync: Because consumer electronics devices are using increasingly complex digital signal processing to enhance the clarity and detail of the content, synchronization of video and audio in user devices has become a greater challenge and could potentially require complex end-user adjustments. HDMI 1.3 incorporates automatic audio synching capabilities that allows devices to perform this synchronization automatically with total accuracy.
* New HD lossless audio formats: In addition to HDMI’s current ability to support high-bandwidth uncompressed digital audio and all currently-available compressed formats (such as Dolby® Digital and DTS®), HDMI 1.3 adds additional support for new lossless compressed digital audio formats Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio™.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by Icemaster

Is there any advantage to HDMI over component?

I love google.
http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/34579/122868.html

What are DVI, HDMI and Component Video?

DVI/HDMI and Component Video are all video standards which support a variety of resolutions, but which deliver the signal from the source to the display in very different ways. The principal important difference is that DVI/HDMI deliver the signal in a digital format, much the same way that a file is delivered from one computer to another along a network, while Component Video is an analog format, delivering the signal not as a bitstream, but as a set of continuously varying voltages representing (albeit indirectly, as we'll get to in a moment) the red, green and blue components of the signal.

Both DVI/HDMI and Component Video deliver signals as discrete red, green, and blue color components, together with sync information which allows the display to determine when a new line, or a new frame, begins. The DVI/HDMI standard delivers these along three data channels in a format called T.M.D.S., which stands for "Transmission Minimized Differential Signaling." Big words aside, the T.M.D.S. format basically involves a blue channel to which horizontal and vertical sync are added, and separate green and red channels.

Component Video is delivered, similarly, with the color information split up three ways. However, component video uses a "color-difference" type signal, which consists of Luminance (the "Y", or "green," channel, representing the total brightness of the image), Red Minus Luminance (the "Pr," or "Red," channel), and Blue Minus Luminance (the "Pb," or "Blue," channel). The sync pulses for both horizontal and vertical are delivered on the Y channel. The display calculates the values of red, green and blue from the Y, Pb, and Pr signals.

Both signal types, then, are fundamentally quite similar; they break up the image in similar ways, and deliver the same type of information to the display, albeit in different forms. How they differ, as we'll see, will depend to a great extent upon the particular characteristics of the source and display devices, and can depend upon cabling as well.

Isn't Digital Just Better?

It is often supposed by writers on this subject that "digital is better." Digital signal transfer, it is assumed, is error-free, while analog signals are always subject to some amount of degradation and information loss. There is an element of truth to this argument, but it tends to fly in the face of real-world considerations. First, there is no reason why any perceptible degradation of an analog component video signal should occur even over rather substantial distances; the maximum runs in home theater installations do not present a challenge for analog cabling built to professional standards. Second, it is a flawed assumption to suppose that digital signal handling is always error-free. DVI and HDMI signals aren't subject to error correction; once information is lost, it's lost for good. That is not a consideration with well-made cable over short distances, but can easily become a factor at distance.

http://www.engadgethd.com/2007/09/13/hdmi-vs-component/

In the mad rush for the latest and greatest, it's easy to categorize older technologies as inferior just because they're older. We've covered the topic of HDMI vs. component before, and there's definitely a lot of FUD behind the widespread belief that the newer HDMI standard is always "better." The bottom line is this, the gear on either side of the cable often has a far larger effect on final image quality than the cable itself. With well designed equipment, that old-school component connection may perform just as well as the HDMI one. Factor in HDMI's shorter reach, higher priced switching equipment, and mechanical stability issues, and you may end up with an inferior overall solution. Trust your own eyes and ears more than any marketing speak, as some of the push behind HDMI has nothing to do with image quality.

[whiskyb]

I ordered mine through bluejeancable.com. I liked being able to order any length I wanted to keep the back of my receivers neat and tidy

[Icemaster]

Thank you Steve!

[Steve Carlton]

Since HDMI is digital and Component Video is analog, you're better off going with HDMI. My understanding is the Component Video output signal is a conversion down from digital that gets converted back to digital in the HDTV.

[TheMentat]

Originally Posted by legion

I was under the impression that because HDMI cables transmit a digital signal, the relative strength or weakness of the signal does not matter. Now better cables did make a difference with an analogue signal, but there was a lot of hype over performance out there IMO.

In other words, as long as they work and stay attached, a cheap HDMI cable should be just as good as an expensive one, and expensive ones make less sense with HDMI.

Bingo!

[bonkers]

Originally Posted by ikarcuaso

I see $50+ ones in store (and not just Monster) and <$10 ones online, both appearing to offer similar features. My service provider has given us an HDMI cable with each of our HD receivers (one is a 1080p model).

I'm guessing paying that in-store premium is a blatant rip off. What's your take on these HDMI cables (in general) and which brand/type/features s/b used?

Check out www.monoprice.com and let the retail stores stick it where the sun don't shine. Their markups on cables are bloody ludicrous!

I bought a 6' "Premium" optical Toslink (audio) cable from monoprice for < $5 plus a couple of bucks shipping. Looks great, works great.

[LeeH]

CNET article on cheap HDMI cables:
http://reviews.cnet.com/hdmi-cable/?tag=rb_content;rb_mtx

[MBAtarga]

monoprice

+1

[vash]

i bought cheap cables chinatown, oakland. even the monster cables were half the price.

[beepbeep]

"Everybody knows" that even digital signals are better when transported trough golden cables that were made by virgins during full-moon. For example, 100$ monster Ethernet cables make my spelling better ... now how do I make this text green?


Frankly, as long as HDMI cables are stable enough mechanically to stay in place once you plug them in, I see no reason whatsoever to buy expensive ones. The googled text about component cabling is a reason makes me laugh. All 1080p sources are digital...using component cables means that digital signal is decompressed, converted to analog by DA converter, then converted into YUV space by analog electronics, then transported trough cables which introduce extra damping, then converted into digital again so that panel can do its DSP processing, then converted back to analog so that LCD panel can display it.