Exotic HDMI cables - scam?

On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 07:47:48 -0700 (PDT), airsmoothed
wrote:



True, but the 'eye' of each differential signal has to be open enough
to allow reliable decoding of the raw bitstream, which isn't
necessarily going to be the case with a really crappy cable rounding
off the sharp transitions off the pulses. This can be seen on the
'scope traces on the link I posted earlier, where the 'eye' is
virtually closed in the upper photo, although as I said that's
probably the crappiest cable ever, deliberately chose by Monster.


Scope traces - mmm

I once worked for someone (A BT manager0 who once came in to our
repeater station and in the course of a converstaion he said he was
having a a problem with his hi-fi

When asked what the problem was he said there was some noise on the
O/P

What did it sound like? he was asked

the reply was

"Oh you CANT HEAR it, but I can see it on an oscilloscope"

It was decided that he should return the scope and never use it again
--
Cheers

Peter

(Reply to address is a spam trap - pse reply to the group)

"Steve Thackery" wrote in message
...

"bugbear" wrote in message

However, this review site seems to
be detecting differences:

(Super test: HDMI cables)
http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/artic...N/1170/v/3/sp/

I'm actually quite used to buying good analogue cable,
but is "exotic" HDMI cable pure pointless bull****?

Yes. That report is complete and utter ********. When they start talking
about differences in "colour fidelity" and "skin tones" it shows that they
haven't a bloody clue how any of it works.

Note how there is never any objective evidence, it's ALWAYS subjective.
And I'll be my bottom dollar it's not even single-blinded, never mind
double-blinded.

Of course, I (and everybody else) accept that digital signals can be
corrupted by interference, too much loss, echoes, and so on. But PROVIDED
the cable and interconnects deliver an error-free bit stream to the
display device, then the picture and sound quality is going to be
identical to that produced by a cable costing ten times more. Absolutely
identical.

Agreed.

Unlike analogue signals it ought to be very easy to do a proper test of a
digital cable as well.
Feed a known signal down it and compare the data at the far end to the
original.
If the 1s and 0s are in the same order , the picture will be identical.


--
Alex

Dr Zoidberg said...

If the 1s and 0s are in the same order , the picture will be identical.


And if the receiving equipment cannot decode the 1s & 0s due to
smearing of the leading and trailing edges and reflections of the
signal by uncontrolled impedance in excessively long or poorly
constructed cables would the picture still be the same.

--
Ken O'Meara
http://www.btinternet.com/~unsteadyken/

Borg wrote:
All exotic means is foreign.

I don't think so.

BugBear

In message , bugbear
writes
Borg wrote:
All exotic means is foreign.

I don't think so.

There was a pub near here that used to have 'exotic dancing' on
Wednesday evenings. I doubt if the dancers were very foreign.
--
Ian

In article ,
UnsteadyKen
wrote:
Dr Zoidberg said...

If the 1s and 0s are in the same order , the picture will be identical.


And if the receiving equipment cannot decode the 1s & 0s due to
smearing of the leading and trailing edges and reflections of the
signal by uncontrolled impedance in excessively long or poorly
constructed cables would the picture still be the same.

Unfortunately that view is based on some assumptions that can easily
mislead. The receiver/decoder may not be looking for "edges", and what you
see as "smearing" on a scope screen may have no effect since it is an
artefact of the scope display and human vision when a number of portions of
the waveform are overlaid by the scope circuitry.

Note that your statement starts with "and if". That "if" may simply not
return TRUE in many practical cases even when you can see loads of
"smearing" and sloped or misshaped "edges" on a scope.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"UnsteadyKen" wrote in message
m...

And if the receiving equipment cannot decode the 1s & 0s due to
smearing of the leading and trailing edges and reflections of the
signal by uncontrolled impedance in excessively long or poorly
constructed cables would the picture still be the same.

We've explained all that already. Check further down the thread.

SteveT

On 09/04/2010 10:41, UnsteadyKen wrote:
Dr Zoidberg said...

If the 1s and 0s are in the same order , the picture will be identical.


And if the receiving equipment cannot decode the 1s& 0s due to
smearing of the leading and trailing edges and reflections of the
signal by uncontrolled impedance in excessively long or poorly
constructed cables would the picture still be the same.

It depends on the amount of errors...

First you get 'sparklies' - individual random pixels.
Next you get random blocks/freezes.

With higher error rates you don't get a picture.


G

On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:35:12 +0100, Borg wrote:

All exotic means is foreign.

It did originally but the meaning has been extended to include dancers.

I suppose the original idea was that "exotic dancers" were performing a
foreign style of dance. It makes it sound more "respectable".


--
Peter Duncanson
(in uk.tech.digital-tv)

"J G Miller" wrote in message ...
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 20:19:25 +0100, Roderick Stewart wrote:

Luckily the electrons won't know the difference.

It should be noted however that there are different versions of HDMI,
for which one needs an appropriate version cable for the newer features
and specifications.

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


Is it like Scart leads more wires in use also better quality wire and
screening?
I recall having to replace scart leads form 8 wires to 21, then again for
thicker wire and individual screening.
Regards
David