INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Differance in HDMI cables performance  (Read 2222 times)

Audioseduction

  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • World Class Referance Playback!
Differance in HDMI cables performance
« on: May 15, 2012, 07:45:15 am »

Is there a differance in performance in the more expensive high-end cables upwards a few hundred dollars or is it a wast of money? I personaly believe cables can make a differance. Which HDMI cables do you use?
Logged

Mr ChriZ

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 4375
  • :-D
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2012, 07:59:32 am »

Is there a differance in performance in the more expensive high-end cables upwards a few hundred dollars or is it a wast of money? I personaly believe cables can make a differance. Which HDMI cables do you use?

I recently bought some that were 2 for £2 ($3-$4)
They're working flawlessly.  I bought 2 packs because they were so cheap!

fooze

  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 72
  • TURN IT UP
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2012, 08:07:01 am »

Well, they look better.
Logged

glynor

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 19608
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2012, 09:36:01 am »

It depends...

Higher quality shielding and interconnects can increase the length limits on HDMI and DVI.  I use RapidRun AV Digital Runners when I need to do medium-length runs.  I've used them for a few 60-75' runs and they work great.  For long-haul runs, you have to convert to fiber or HD-SDI.

But HDMI is digital with error correction built-in, not analog.  It either works or it doesn't.  So, if a cheap cable works, it works, and the audio it carries will be bit-perfect.  In fact, the heavier gauge cables can often be problematic because the HDMI connector isn't designed for a lot of vertical force, and the weight of the cable can break the HDMI socket on your devices.  I've had this happen here and there with devices at the office when people buy their own ridiculous gold-plated 20awg cables for too much money at Best Buy.

For short runs (~10' or so), you can't go wrong with the cheapo HDMI cables on Monoprice.
Logged
"Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese."

Visit me on the Interweb Thingie: http://glynor.com/

InflatableMouse

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3978
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2012, 01:50:36 pm »

A few hundred dollars I would say you've been had  :-* ... with all respect to people who buy them I think that is a total waste of money. Same with optical cables.

I go with the cheaper ones, not the very cheapest but still relatively cheap, maybe 25-30 euros. I do keep them as short as possible. I'd only look for different (read: more expensive) if I encounter an issue with these cheap ones. So far, I've never had an issue.

But HDMI is digital with error correction built-in, not analog.  It either works or it doesn't.

To add a little bit to that, error correction on hdmi is not the same though as say, network error correction. Information cannot be resent as over ethernet and a packet only contains 8-bit ECC information for error correction. If that isn't sufficient, data is lost and if data is lost, corruption will occur. Minor errors won't even be noticed in video but audio glitches are easier to spot.
Logged

Hendrik

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 10753
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2012, 03:07:27 am »

There is only two types of HDMI cables. "Standard" and "High-Speed". Both can be had for rather cheap, depending on length and whatnot.
Like mentioned before, its all Digital. Either it works, or it doesn't. 1 or 0.

It may make a small difference if you have really long cables (like glynor explained), but even then those cables that are $100+ are just a waste of money.
Most people won't use that long cables, though.

And when i say "difference", the difference is between it working and it not working, there will never be a visual or audible difference.
Logged
~ nevcairiel
~ Author of LAV Filters

glynor

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 19608
Re: Differance in HDMI cables performance
« Reply #6 on: May 18, 2012, 08:25:02 am »

It may make a small difference if you have really long cables (like glynor explained), but even then those cables that are $100+ are just a waste of money.
Most people won't use that long cables, though.

I've regularly used (it is working today, actually), a 75' run of HDMI using these:
http://www.rapidrun.com/product_list.asp?cat_id=4109

They are more than $100, but they're Plenum or CL2 rated (so they can be run through walls and not make fire marshals cry), and they work at those lengths.  At those lengths, you need special active cables, and they're not cheap (nor are converters to HD-SDI to make even longer runs), especially if you want ones that you would be willing to run through walls.

The RapidRun AV cabling system is absolutely awesome for long, in-wall cable runs.  Interchangeable ends mean you can convert the connectors later, if needed, and more importantly, if the cable breaks it is usually just a cheap flying-lead or wall plate, not the in-wall cable.

PS.  Don't pay retail from Cables2Go if you ever buy these.  Check Amazon.  They're 1/2 to 1/3rd the price.
Logged
"Some cultures are defined by their relationship to cheese."

Visit me on the Interweb Thingie: http://glynor.com/
Pages: [1]   Go Up