I just wanted to say that high quality hdmi cables does make a substantial difference in picture quality. I don't know why that is since it's all digital data but believe it or not it DOES!!! I did not invest on the infamous Monsters which charge a premium but on no name brand high quality ones bought from ebay for $8.98 6F. These are extremely well built hdmi 1.3b1 cables, same quality construction as the $150 monsters. Ever since using these new cables, my dvd's look so much sharper with more natural colors which were absent before using monoprice and the same goes for my blu-ray's, I couldn't believe the difference myself since I was in the same boat as people saying that $1 hdmi cables are as good as $200 ones which to my experience is not true.

I'm not trying to preach to anyone to go buy themselves expensive cables but wanted to let anyone interested know that high quality hdmi cables does effect the picture quality.

this is also not a knock against Monoprice, they're an excellent online vendor which offer excellent value.

my .2

here we go again... :rolleyes:

when are people going to learn?

It's an optical delusion.

The only way to properly determine the difference between the two cables is a blind test. You have someone else randomly change the cables without telling you which it is, while you look at the picture. Only if you can reliably determine a difference between cables after numerous trials is there truly a difference.

Your eyes need to be in the Smithsonian. I'll stick with my $1.00 Amazon HDMI cables. I cannot tell the difference in my setup from the $100 ones, one Monster and one some other high dollar brand I own. I tried to see a difference... None that I could see.

You should know by now that your opinion doesn't matter. If everyone says you can't see a difference, than you can't see a difference.

I'm not sure how, but it's been proven 1000% beyond a doubt that anyone that thinks their cables make a difference need to get their heads checked :D

I just wanted to say that high quality hdmi cables does make a substantial difference in picture quality.

In what way? What test material and test patterns did you observe and/or measure, and how did they differ when replacing only HDMI cabling while not making any other system changes whatsoever?

You should know by now that your opinion doesn't matter. If everyone says you can't see a difference, than you can't see a difference.

I'm not sure how, but it's been proven 1000% beyond a doubt that anyone that thinks their cables make a difference need to get their heads checked :D

I don't get involved in the analog cable religious wars.

this is digital though. and I'm 1000% sure that if someone thinks their colors are changing because of a "better" hdmi cable, they don't have a grasp of the fundamentals of the technology.

In what way? What test material and test patterns did you observe and/or measure, and how did they differ when replacing only HDMI cabling while not making any other system changes whatsoever?

I mainly tested using movies that I was familiar with and knew what to look for. I know that it doesn't make any sense since digital information is digital information but all I know is that it did make a difference........and I'm sure it's not an illusion either.

I mainly tested using movies that I was familiar with and knew what to look for.

Can you give any specific example other than "gee, I think it looked more gooder?"

I mean, without any hard evidence, your statements cannot be taken seriously.

Can you give any specific example other than "gee, I think it looked more gooder?"

I mean, without any hard evidence, your statements cannot be taken seriously.

Shoosh sir, I'm busy getting up and dancing because my soundstage has widened three-fold! :p

Shoosh sir, I'm busy getting up and dancing because my soundstage has widened three-fold! :p

silly... EVERYONE knows that digital makes your sound stage collapse... :p

on topic, i'm waiting real patiently for someone to produce evidence contrary to the science... every week or so, one of these threads seems to pop up... not one person can produce anything other than "i think it looks better"...

if they took 5 minutes (heck, 2 minutes) and did a bit of reading, they'd realize that what they "think they are seeing" simply isn't possible...

Can you give any specific example other than "gee, I think it looked more gooder?"

I mean, without any hard evidence, your statements cannot be taken seriously.

look!!! you don't have to take anything, all I'm saying is what I have experienced with the better cables.

silly... EVERYONE knows that digital makes your sound stage collapse... :p

on topic, i'm waiting real patiently for someone to produce evidence contrary to the science... every week or so, one of these threads seems to pop up... not one person can produce anything other than "i think it looks better"...

if they took 5 minutes (heck, 2 minutes) and did a bit of reading, they'd realize that what they "think they are seeing" simply isn't possible...

that's what I thought before experiencing the phenomena myself. Now!!! call me crazy or delusional but I swear I did see the difference.

Your eyes need to be in the Smithsonian. I'll stick with my $1.00 Amazon HDMI cables. I cannot tell the difference in my setup from the $100 ones, one Monster and one some other high dollar brand I own. I tried to see a difference... None that I could see.

is your display plasma or lcd? I think the difference is more apparent on lcd hd tv's, at least it did on mine.

that's what I thought before experiencing the phenomena myself. Now!!! call me crazy or delusional but I swear I did see the difference.

ok... you are crazy or delusional... ;) :p

hey, if it makes you feel better, use the cables... but if you expect that you are going to make that fly here, you have an unreasonable expectation level... ;)

like I said in my first post, I'm not trying convince anyone to go out and buy $300 cables only what I've experienced, it's not like I spent loads of money on these cables and justify the expense by trying to convince myself that there must be that $200 difference. All I've spent is a measly $27 for 3 6feet high quality hdmi cables.

these are the cables I bought!!!

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/2536/screenshot004g.jpg

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/6378/screenshot003h.jpg

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/8227/screenshot002b.jpg

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3373/screenshot001z.jpg

If its bells and whistles you desire, these are arguably the best HDMI cable pound for pound:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024004&p_id=4965&seq=1&format=2

imo

If its bells and whistles you desire, these are arguably the best HDMI cable pound for pound:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024004&p_id=4965&seq=1&format=2

imo


You're CRAZY spending $8.00 for HDMI Cables for your multi-thousand dollar system when you can get one for $1.00 that is exactly the same. Why don't you just throw your money in the garbage :rolleyes:

Seriously, this argument has been going on for the 20+ years that I have been in this industry. Even with analog cables, there's always those that swear cable is cable and you're crazy if you think you can tell the difference.

I am a big believer in cables making the difference in the analog world, even though the majority will say the same thing being said here about cables not making a difference, it's impossible, I don't understand electrical theory or acoustics, etc.

I have never done any serious comparisons of HMDI Cables, and to me I can't tell a difference in the cables I've compared casually. But I know several people that swear they can, that are very picky about these things and have done a lot of comparison and based on their knowledge, systems, etc I have no reason to doubt them.

As mentioned, I've been in this industry a long time, I'm familiar with the fundamentals of analog and digital technology, but I also know that things don't always work as they are theoretically supposed to, and that there are many factors involved in electronics besides just 1s and 0s. I've heard the arguments with analog, digital optical, digital coaxial, and now HDMI.

I just don't agree with those that say 100% without a doubt that someone can't see or hear a difference, just because I can't.

But as I mentioned, I've generally given up on these discussions because those that are firmly entrenched in either school (those that can tell, and those that can't) are not going to be persuaded to accept the others' viewpoint, so it's a pointless discussion (kinda like this one...you say I can see the difference, and they say you can't, you're delusional, you don't know anything, etc, and you say yes i can but whatever, you don't have to believe me, etc, etc)

look!!! you don't have to take anything, all I'm saying is what I have experienced with the better cables.

In what way? I have asked you repeatedly to describe EXACTLY what was different. How did you measure it, and what test patterns did you use? Details please!

obviously this subject is upsetting many people so mods please either lock or remove this thread. I will keep my opinions to myself.

sorry. when you come and post an opinion like you did, you should expect to catch some flak for it, and should be prepared to at least present some type of evidence that you are correct...

especially when your opinion is along the lines of "i think the earth is flat, because it looks flat to me, and who cares what the science says"... :)

obviously this subject is upsetting many people so mods please either lock or remove this thread. I will keep my opinions to myself.

I'm not upset at all. I'm just asking you what you saw. You said that you saw differences, and I would like to know exactly what those differences were and how you measured them.

overall image sharpness and more natural colors in key movie scenes that I'm familiar with. I did not use any test patterns or anything just going with what my eyes sees.

I am also going to stick with my less than $5 hdmi cable =)

good!! so you should!

overall image sharpness and more natural colors in key movie scenes that I'm familiar with. I did not use any test patterns or anything just going with what my eyes sees.

In other words, you are saying you didn't actually test anything.

In other words, you are saying you didn't actually test anything.

are you surprised? ;)

this is my last post, I have said my peace.

Please mods lock this thread or remove.

Please dont remove!! I think this is good info. Thanks to all. I was debating buying some decent priced cables. I noticed some were a little bigger gauge than other, and they claimed 99.9% oxygen free, 120Hx, etc etc. I think after reading this I am going to go with the cheapest v1.3s I can find...thanks all!

Well, I have to disagree about this post having good info...just more of the age old cable argument, BUT...

I don't think you should base your decision to buy the cheapest 1.3 hdmi available on this post, because if you're only basing it on this post you might be shooting yourself in the foot.

There's many posts here that will educate you on when you should invest in bigger gauge cables, pay more, etc.

Most people agree that if it's a shorter cable (6 ft for example) that you shouldn't see a difference in picture quality (but obviously there's still those that believe you will), but if it's a longer cable you should definitely get something that has a larger gauge construction or you may have problems with your signal transfer (sparklies, maybe no picture at all, etc).

You may, however, notice a difference in construction quality for some of the cheaper cables, but usually if you check out reviews first you can decide that part.

I'm not saying that you should throw away money, and not directed towards you specifically (I read so many posts that say buy the cheapest cable you can find which isn't always good advice), but it's amazing to me that people will spend $2,000 or $3,000 or more on their Home Theater systems, but won't spend $20.00 on a decent cable - the cost of lunch or two tickets to a movie, or 4 or 5 cups of latte - a cable that they will use for possibly years.

Ok, I'm done and ready to get blasted for my comments, but I just find it amazing to see.

I read a review in sound and vision mag.or one abs.sound or hm thtre mag. that said there is proof that a high speed hdmi cable exist

I read a review in sound and vision mag.or one abs.sound or hm thtre mag. that said there is proof that a high speed hdmi cable exist

Yes, and it can be found on Monoprice.com for about 6 bucks.

skeelo58,

Thanks for the info.

Chester

Well, I have to disagree about this post having good info...just more of the age old cable argument, BUT...

I don't think you should base your decision to buy the cheapest 1.3 hdmi available on this post, because if you're only basing it on this post you might be shooting yourself in the foot.

There's many posts here that will educate you on when you should invest in bigger gauge cables, pay more, etc.

Most people agree that if it's a shorter cable (6 ft for example) that you shouldn't see a difference in picture quality (but obviously there's still those that believe you will), but if it's a longer cable you should definitely get something that has a larger gauge construction or you may have problems with your signal transfer (sparklies, maybe no picture at all, etc).

You may, however, notice a difference in construction quality for some of the cheaper cables, but usually if you check out reviews first you can decide that part.

I'm not saying that you should throw away money, and not directed towards you specifically (I read so many posts that say buy the cheapest cable you can find which isn't always good advice), but it's amazing to me that people will spend $2,000 or $3,000 or more on their Home Theater systems, but won't spend $20.00 on a decent cable - the cost of lunch or two tickets to a movie, or 4 or 5 cups of latte - a cable that they will use for possibly years.

Ok, I'm done and ready to get blasted for my comments, but I just find it amazing to see.

The relative cost of the system has no bearing on the cost of the cabling for a particular application. The application determines the cabling needs, and the needs determines in part, the cost. Yes there absolutely are times and applications where cabling quality matters, or is even crucial. And there are times where the demands are very simple, and there is no reason to overspend for cabling performance that is not necessary.

If you put a $50K display 3 feet away from your blu-ray player and need an HDMI cable, a 4$ cable or a throwaway that came in the box is probably all you would ever need. If you put a $1K TV 50 feet away from your bluray player, you may need to pay much much more attention to the quality of the HDMI cabling, and spend significantly more. There is no reason to spend more money in the former example simply because the system is so much more expensive. System expense doesn't have anything to do with cabling demands.

You're missing my point...I'm not saying there's a formula for determining cable costs, etc. What I'm saying is for someone to invest this much in their system, then to say I'm going to buy the cheapest cable I can find cause that's what everyone tells me to do is ridiculous.

If all things are equal, sure, buy the cable for $1.00 if you're sure it's gonna work. But that's not always the case, and there are things to consider sometimes besides signal transfer. What if the $1.00 cable isn't HDMI spec, even though they all claim they are, and the connector is looser than normal so it comes out and damages your HDMI Input (yes, that happens) then it really wasn't worth it.

That's why I said check our reviews, etc and that i'm not saying to throw away your money.

The poster was saying after reading this post he's gonna buy the cheapest cables possible, and my point is that's not always the right thing to do (for example if he's trying to run a 30 foot HDMI Cable - he didn't clarify that).

So I'm not saying (and never implied) there's a direct ratio of cable to equipment expense, just that "buy the cheapest cable you can find" doesn't always serve your best interest.

You're missing my point...I'm not saying there's a formula for determining cable costs, etc. What I'm saying is for someone to invest this much in their system, then to say I'm going to buy the cheapest cable I can find cause that's what everyone tells me to do is ridiculous.

But why? I think it's more silly to spend more money for no good reason except that one spent a great deal of money on other components, therefore spending more money on ancillary stuff is necessary. By the same token, I would disagree with advice to buy "the cheapest cable I can find" in quite a few cases because sometimes you actually do need to pay attention to cabling performance. But there are cases where it absolutely does not matter, and the cheapest possible cable is totally appropriate, and there is no logical reason to spend a penny more. Your argument that one should just spend more money because the system costs more is a purely emotional one.


If all things are equal, sure, buy the cable for $1.00 if you're sure it's gonna work. But that's not always the case, and there are things to consider sometimes besides signal transfer. What if the $1.00 cable isn't HDMI spec, even though they all claim they are, and the connector is looser than normal so it comes out and damages your HDMI Input (yes, that happens) then it really wasn't worth it.

Sure.


That's why I said check our reviews, etc and that i'm not saying to throw away your money.

The poster was saying after reading this post he's gonna buy the cheapest cables possible, and my point is that's not always the right thing to do (for example if he's trying to run a 30 foot HDMI Cable - he didn't clarify that).

So I'm not saying (and never implied) there's a direct ratio of cable to equipment expense, just that "buy the cheapest cable you can find" doesn't always serve your best interest.

Sure. But sometimes it can work for your interests quite well actually. I find that a lot of boutique or otherwise very expensive cables are actually quite a bit WORSE than very cheap cabling readily available at radio shack or wherever. People can easily spend hundreds of dollars on cables that are equally as bad as the throwaway cables that came for free in the box. Going to radio shack, or monoprice, or whereever and spending LESS money can often get you superior cables.

like I said in my first post, I'm not trying convince anyone to go out and buy $300 cables only what I've experienced, it's not like I spent loads of money on these cables and justify the expense by trying to convince myself that there must be that $200 difference. All I've spent is a measly $27 for 3 6feet high quality hdmi cables.

I had 65 feets with only 189 $ but extra cost was postage of course but anyway the price concerning the lenght was very cheap. Cable is this http://www.zestacables.com/en/index.php?id=92 . Works fine with PS3 and projector without any problems.

what's "nylon mash"
Best,
C

Could someone please read the following and note there is a difference as to the standards.

There is a diff between a 1.3, 1.3a, 1.3b, 1.3b1 and the 1.3c

Is an inexpensive cable just as good as an expensive one this comes down to the wording for the cable which I have not heard mentioned. High Speed or High Performance if the less expensive units states this they are good enough to use to connect an external component to a LCD or Plasma TV. When is it really important for the cable to be good is the length of the cable from the component to the TV the laws of OHMs comes into effect to which I have seen and produce throughout some projects that I have worked on.

In the past did I buy Monster Cables for sound for my stereo no as I have learned that simple lamp cord with a higher gauge did the same thing for less the cost. However when recording sound to a film did we use the top of the line XLR cables you bet we would use Starquad XLR cables and this did make the difference? Yes! So as to the HDMI cable question at hand those who stated they could see the difference.

How does one test a TV not by the eye from a film or a video did you us an SMPTE color bars projected to the monitor from a computer or video device. Or did you use a vectorscope to set the pattern of the waves as this test never lies. Eyes no matter how good you think you see can play tricks on you yet the scope or the bars well they are what we live by.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMPTE_color_bars

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vectorscope

Could someone please read the following and note there is a difference as to the standards.

There is a diff between a 1.3, 1.3a, 1.3b, 1.3b1 and the 1.3c

Actually, all of those are exactly the same standard, as far as cabling is concerned. First, there's no such thing as HDMI 1.3b, 1.3b1 and 1.3c--1.3a is the current spec version. Those other version numbers refer to the Compliance Testing Specification, and the CTS hasn't materially changed since 1.3 with respect to standard passive HDMI cables. Main spec 1.3a and the previous 1.3 are identical with regard to cables. Generally the main spec version changes have to do with non-cable issues, and the CTS keeps getting updated as the HDMI people figure out more or better tests for compliance, but apart from some important changes which occurred at the 1.2/1.3 switch, cable testing has remained relatively boring and straightforward the whole time.

There is a difference between "Category 1" and "Category 2" testing, or, as HDMI Licensing now likes people to call them, "standard" and "high-speed" HDMI cables. Unfortunately, it's hard to tell which cables are actually certified at which speed, as many vendors aren't particularly up-front about it...

Kurt
Blue Jeans Cable (http://www.bluejeanscable.com/hdmi-cables/index.htm)

I saw a 1.3B at Radio Shack the other day, I am not trying to slam nor troll.....
and is greatly used in gaming:
http://www.engadgethd.com/2008/06/15/solid-signal-hops-in-the-hdmi-1-3b-cable-game/


Yet I think they are just trying to sell the name as to your point no one is really setting a baseline to adhere to or to start from. It was fun just looking for mine they made it so hard to read the fine print on those cables I mean I needed a magnifying glass.

And what about those nice people in the UK that are ahead of the game in this area for now:
http://www.tvcables.co.uk/cgi-bin/tvcables/hdmi-1.3c-cable-1.5m.html

I guess they love the 1.3c for it's higher res I don't know however P. T. Barnum was right "There's a customer born every minute" Not "There's a suck born every minute"


Funniest thing on the bottom of my page is a link to:
http://www.jpslabs.com/index.shtml

How'd they do that???

OK went to your site read about the HDMI cables and the differences between them as well as going to http://www.hdmi.org/ as well. Your point is well stated and I understand now what you are conveying.

By the way liked your site and the prices look good as well.

this is my last post, I have said my peace.

Please mods lock this thread or remove.
swifty, don't feel bad. I've been ambushed by the haters and monoprice gangs so I understand what you're going through...and by that idiot who keeps asking if you done any technical tests to why you're seeing improvments.

I mean how stupid is that? do you ask someone who buys hundred dollar wine over trader joes if they done any tests? do you ask someone who prefers to buy shell/chevron gas over am/pm gas why their cars feel better if they tested the gas? some things are just damn obvious and sure that why would any stupid tests be needed for one's decision and preferences.

zoey67 I am in no way defending myself or others as to test however a young lady and I were working on a photo project (yes it is germane to a point).

Well as to our project we kept having problems with the way the photos were coming out I then remembered did she have her monitor setup like mine. She was in Sioux City me in Chicago well like we were going to meet half way to setup a calibration.

However she came to visit my daughter in Chicago and we did finally have our monitors matched on our MacBook Pros which turned out to be quite fun with each being setup for their tastes.

I hope this helps in some way to explain what one sees or hears may or may not be close some are even color blind or they miss artifacts. Also for what I get hired for I am a cleaner for film projects before they go to post and burn off 1,000 to 10,000 DVDs I look for the blips, drops frames, timelines, audio and video match ups or the obvious blunders.

Man do I have some good ones there...........

Sorry Zoey, but your analogies are not appropriate. Passing digital data from point A to point B is a straightforward and non-subjective task. The flavor of wine is both a subjective and objective thing, but transfering data is not. If the data passes from point A to point B with zero errors then the medium through which the data flows has accomplished its job perfectly. This is testable and verifyable through testing. In my lab I am able to test how much margin a link will have so that I will know how robust the link will be. This is because some sources and sinks have poor performance and having adequate margin will ensure that a cable will work for all (properly operating) combinations of equipment. But for a consumer you just need to try the cable in your system and see if it works with no sparklies at the highest resolution your system operates at.

The effects of errors in an HDMI link are not subtle. You will see individual pixels flicker to an obvious wrong color when the cable has issues. If the error rate is high then complete lines of video will flash to the wrong color or you will get no image at all. If one of the data pairs is disconnected then you will have a strong hue to the entire image on your screen (because one of the color components is lost). This can also happen if the source and sink are not operating in the same color space - but this is not a link issue. Using certain test patterns will stress the link and make the errors even easier to see.

I have tested HDMI and DVI cable costing several hundreds of dollars. At home I use $8 HDMI cables I was able to get locally - because in my system they work error free, which is easy to see.

There's some sellers on ebay that sells Monster stuffs for more than half price. Are those real? Are they worth it? (Surge Protectors)

Any product that has that many spelling errors in their promotional pics, to me, is not very high quality.

I don't want cheap, flimsy cables or anything so I don't want $1 cables. However, I'm not going to buy Monster or anything like that. I have a Monoprice HDMI cable; 6-foot, braided jacket, pretty hefty, maybe cost $9-something with shipping. BDs and games through my PS3 to my Kuro look outstanding. Now I just need to upgrade to a new receiver so I can take advantage of the newer sound formats as well.

There's some sellers on ebay that sells Monster stuffs for more than half price. Are those real? Are they worth it? (Surge Protectors)

I dunno, they are probably OK. Personally, I don't pay for anything with the Monster name anymore just because I don't want to pay for their huge markups. I have some old monster RCAs and the PS2 s-video cable and they are really well put together. I've heard their surge protectors and power conditioners are solid too, BUT they are likely WAY overpriced compared to similar products.

Now, I recently bought the APC H15 power conditioner/surge protector. Lots of people on these boards were recommending it and it is available for under $200. Aesthetically speaking it doesn't blow me away (it's silver and all my stuff is black) but it appears every place wanted the full MSRP for the black model (closer to $400). There were a lot of Panamax models that looked badass and would have went great with my system but they all seemed to be upwards of $400-$600 and that just wan't gonna happen for this component.

Now, it is arguable that me (or anyone) actually has to have power conditioning or voltage regulation but anyway, that was the unit I bought. Surge protection IS a must though and you can probably get away with a nice "power strip" style protector. From all the research I did on my APC I would recommend sticking to the well known manufacturers like APC, Belkin, Panamax, Tripp Lite, etc. A really good power strip can be had for under $100.

Sorry Zoey, but your analogies are not appropriate. Passing digital data from point A to point B is a straightforward and non-subjective task. The flavor of wine is both a subjective and objective thing, but transfering data is not.
Im sorry to tell you that viewing video and being able to tell good from bad is just as subjective and objective as wine tasting alright. TV as being one of my fav pastime since the age of 8, I apprceciate a good picture and able to tell the diff between good and bad cables, an ISF or non-ISF picture more so than the average person who doesn't care much as long they can get a picture.

Just like some ppl cant tell diff between S video and component, component and HDMI, good cables and generic cables. etc.

I have tested HDMI and DVI cable costing several hundreds of dollars. At home I use $8 HDMI cables I was able to get locally - because in my system they work error free, which is easy to see.

oh you have? so tell me...which brand of HDMI and DVI costing several hundred dollars did you test mr know it all.

Zoey, you are confusing analog signal transfer and digital signal transfer. Yes, with analog signal transfer (s-video, component video, composite video) the differences that cables make can be subtle and might require a keen eye to observe.

HDMI is a digital uncompressed link that when an error occurs a pixel will be of an incorrect value for the period of duration that the errored pixel appears on the screen (1/60th or 1/24th a second). You can easily observe these errors with a cable that has problems. You can probably find images on the web of HDTV screens showing bright green, blue, or red pixels in the middle of a dark scene - an example of these errors.

Errors in a compressed digital link are much different and I will not go into those details but they can occur in MPEG streams (DirecTV, digital cable).

As far as the cables I have measured, I can not divulge the manufacturers because the company I work for has non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) with these companies and would rather not put myself at risk by discussing them.

With all of this said - yes, there can be big differences in HDMI cables that will allow well-manufactured cables to operate error-free over much longer distances than other cables. But once again the effects of cables that cause errors are easily viewed even without test equipment because the errors are so easy to see. Just about any HDMI cable 4 meters or shorter can operate without causing errors.

FOD, do yourself a favor, and don't waste the bandwidth... ;)

Im sorry to tell you that viewing video and being able to tell good from bad is just as subjective and objective as wine tasting alright. TV as being one of my fav pastime since the age of 8, I apprceciate a good picture and able to tell the diff between good and bad cables, an ISF or non-ISF picture more so than the average person who doesn't care much as long they can get a picture.

Just like some ppl cant tell diff between S video and component, component and HDMI, good cables and generic cables. etc.

Except that cabling quality with analog cables has an affect on the signal that is gradual and varies. With digital signaling with HDMI the change is absolute. Either the data is present, or it isn't. It's either 100%, or 0%. Either the cable works, or it does not work.

If the cabling quality is sufficient that the picture is there, youa re getting 100%, and there will be no differences among cables that are capable of transmitting at the bandwidth under test. At all. Period.

You're CRAZY spending $8.00 for HDMI Cables for your multi-thousand dollar system when you can get one for $1.00 that is exactly the same. Why don't you just throw your money in the garbage :rolleyes:

Seriously, this argument has been going on for the 20+ years that I have been in this industry. Even with analog cables, there's always those that swear cable is cable and you're crazy if you think you can tell the difference.

I am a big believer in cables making the difference in the analog world, even though the majority will say the same thing being said here about cables not making a difference, it's impossible, I don't understand electrical theory or acoustics, etc.

I have never done any serious comparisons of HMDI Cables, and to me I can't tell a difference in the cables I've compared casually. But I know several people that swear they can, that are very picky about these things and have done a lot of comparison and based on their knowledge, systems, etc I have no reason to doubt them.

As mentioned, I've been in this industry a long time, I'm familiar with the fundamentals of analog and digital technology, but I also know that things don't always work as they are theoretically supposed to, and that there are many factors involved in electronics besides just 1s and 0s. I've heard the arguments with analog, digital optical, digital coaxial, and now HDMI.

I just don't agree with those that say 100% without a doubt that someone can't see or hear a difference, just because I can't.

But as I mentioned, I've generally given up on these discussions because those that are firmly entrenched in either school (those that can tell, and those that can't) are not going to be persuaded to accept the others' viewpoint, so it's a pointless discussion (kinda like this one...you say I can see the difference, and they say you can't, you're delusional, you don't know anything, etc, and you say yes i can but whatever, you don't have to believe me, etc, etc)

That's what I meant to say, again too late. Well said.
Clears all this up. Am I the last to read this?