Social Feed

Regarding the HDMI cable debate: I'll need to see the results of at least 3 seperate double blind tests. Enough, properly done, double blind tests have been perfromed regarding "Hi-Res audio" and higher sampling rates for audio recording for us to come to the truth, regardless of what are ears and brains THINK they hear.

I shall reserve judgment--and my wallet--until I can review at least 3, independant, properly done, unbiased (not conducted by a cable making company) double-blind tests. I haven't really searched for them, but I just wouldn't want to spend too much on cables anyway. I've found that using my same HDMI "inexpensive" cables, that each upgrade of the Dish box has resulted in better and better PQ having never changed the HDMI cable. The 722K had noticable better PQ; then the Hopper had noticably better PQ; then the HWS had noticably better PQ, just as an example I've experienced, but the difference was easy to notice and others who did not know the box was changed out said they thought I was getting better PQ for some reason, now that was interesting. This seems to suggest the "cheap" cable is doing all it can and the real culprit of PQ is the hardware and software of whatever connected device is ouputting the data, assuming the same display and no changes in the displays settings, as was the case in my upgrades over the years.

But, I still would like to see the 3 double blind tests.

DishSubLA said:

Regarding the HDMI cable debate: I'll need to see the results of at least 3 seperate double blind tests. Enough, properly done, double blind tests have been perfromed regarding "Hi-Res audio" and higher sampling rates for audio recording for us to come to the truth, regardless of what are ears and brains THINK they hear.

I shall reserve judgment--and my wallet--until I can review at least 3, independant, properly done, unbiased (not conducted by a cable making company) double-blind tests. I haven't really searched for them, but I just wouldn't want to spend too much on cables anyway. I've found that using my same HDMI "inexpensive" cables, that each upgrade of the Dish box has resulted in better and better PQ having never changed the HDMI cable. The 722K had noticable better PQ; then the Hopper had noticably better PQ; then the HWS had noticably better PQ, just as an example I've experienced, but the difference was easy to notice and others who did not know the box was changed out said they thought I was getting better PQ for some reason, now that was interesting. This seems to suggest the "cheap" cable is doing all it can and the real culprit of PQ is the hardware and software of whatever connected device is ouputting the data, assuming the same display and no changes in the displays settings, as was the case in my upgrades over the years.

But, I still would like to see the 3 double blind tests.

Click to expand...

I concur with you. There needs to be a certified double blind test. There has been several other post in the past about the different quality of HDMI cables. I think it is time for this to be officially tested by a credible source. I am sure there is better quality in material and workmanship in the cables but I would like to see the different companies/products ranked so we could make a decision on what to purchase.

Of course there are a lot more channels available now, but "back in the day", we use to have a lot of fun signal/satellite hopping with our 15' Hughes steerable C-band dish. My wife really loved getting the Canadian feed of her favorite soap a day ahead of the US feed! Her friends couldn't figure out how she knew so accurately what was going to happen next...

Nothing could beat C-Band. It was never a dull moment. So many interesting feeds.

I remember being able to see or at least hear the musical guests preform during the commercial breaks on the network feed of the Tonight and Late show on c band

the mack said:

I remember being able to see or at least hear the musical guests preform during the commercial breaks on the network feed of the Tonight and Late show on c band

Click to expand...

I also remember seeing news anchors like Dan Rather, pre-broadcast while they were waiting to go on air

charlesrshell said:

I concur with you. There needs to be a certified double blind test. There has been several other post in the past about the different quality of HDMI cables. I think it is time for this to be officially tested by a credible source. I am sure there is better quality in material and workmanship in the cables but I would like to see the different companies/products ranked so we could make a decision on what to purchase.

Click to expand...

Yes, you make a good point. The cheaper HDMI cables usually use the wart of the ferrite, and while people don't see it, I can understand people having concerns about the added weight pulling on the HDMI connection that can also pull on the board. Also, the can just be harder to work with in tight places, so convenience and not having the wart rip something else and doing damage is something to think about, and I've had situations when the HDMI connections on a device does not have enough space between HDMI connections such that the ferrtie core cables take up too much space between the HDMI connections and you are looking at what will be damaging connections. That is a legitimate concern about "cheaper" HDMI cables, depending upon the set up if the cables drop right at the connection with the heavy weight of the external ferrite warts, as well, on the cheapest HDMI cables.

So, absolutely, it may be worth the money for some to pay a higher price for HDMI cables with superior shielding to avoid the situations or problems that the extra weight and space the ferrite core wart can present. Of course, for the most common uses in homes of lengths around 6 feet, in most US homes, I just can't imagine the difference in PQ that either ferrite cores or extra shielding in place of the ferrite cores or even the "best" and expensive HDMI cables can provide. However, at much longer lengths, there certainly could be an appreciative difference, and if it is really long, well then you are looking powered cables with chip-sets and there is no getting around that and the higher price is simply is what it is if one wants to be able to see something at the other end of that cable.

I will say, that when I did some renovations and completely upgraded all the consumer electronics in several rooms of the house, I really preferred to get the more expensive HDMI cables with superior shielding that don't need/have the ferrite core warts. But a lot of dough was already budgeted and I would be purchasing A LOT of HDMI cables at ONE time, and the cost multiplied just did not make sense to me: it would cost way too much money. So I went with the cheaper cables with ferrite core warts. The perform very well. I never had a doubt about that, but I do admit that at times they can be a PITA if I have to re-arrange or mess about here and there because those ferrite cores just get in the way and in a few places, they are really weighing heavy on a few HDMI connections that it is a little disturbing. So, yes, if I had the money, I would have gladly paid for the lighter weight, more sleek HDMI cables for the convenience and peace of mind and even better look (to my eye), and they are far easier to handle, but not because I believed either one would perform any better in my most common 6 foot HDMI cable runs.

Sorry for the long post, but your point is a good one if someone prefers certain HDMI cables for other reasons.