HDMI upgrade?

[teachsac]

Actually there are cables that flow directionally, especially high-end analog cables. While you won't see a difference in the digital domain, you definitely do in the analog world.

S~

 

[Peter Parker]

i found words like this on a few sites

" In some cables, the shield is grounded only on the end that connects to the source, so that interference will drain away from the destination end of the cable.

These audio cables would incorporate directional arrows printed on their outer jackets, and should be hooked up with the arrow pointing away from the source (i.e. the arrow should be pointing in the same direction as the signal flow from source to load)."

BTW that particular piece was taken from Home Theater Audio Cables and Interconnects .

Persoanlly I do not know if those are truly high end cables but it does explain the presence of arrows on some cables.

 

[jayn_j]

i found words like this on a few sites

" In some cables, the shield is grounded only on the end that connects to the source, so that interference will drain away from the destination end of the cable.

These audio cables would incorporate directional arrows printed on their outer jackets, and should be hooked up with the arrow pointing away from the source (i.e. the arrow should be pointing in the same direction as the signal flow from source to load)."

BTW that particular piece was taken from Home Theater Audio Cables and Interconnects .

Persoanlly I do not know if those are truly high end cables but it does explain the presence of arrows on some cables.

This technique is valid in the microwave domain as a way of preventing ground loop antennas, but I don't think it would make much of a difference at a/v frequencies.

 

[Ramy]

I didn't read this whole thread, but if you have a surround receiver and want to hook up a blu-ray player then you must use HDMI to get the Lossless sound. The bandwidth for the new formats of sound is too much for an optical cable.

 

[teachsac]

I didn't read this whole thread, but if you have a surround receiver and want to hook up a blu-ray player then you must use HDMI to get the Lossless sound. The bandwidth for the new formats of sound is too much for an optical cable.

You can get lossless with 5.1/7.1 analogs. The D/A conversion is simply done in the player a s opposed to the receiver.

S~

 

[Peter Parker]

This technique is valid in the microwave domain as a way of preventing ground loop antennas, but I don't think it would make much of a difference at a/v frequencies.

All I can say is go ahead and try it both ways. I suspect you will not be satisfied with what you hear if it is plugged in improperly. having said that I think that is a clear fault of the cable. I would not use them.

 

[Peter Parker]

I am totally confused now. i did not think that there was a bandwidth problem for audio using either digital coax or optical cables. I thought that for audio they were equivalent to HDMI.

I am not questioning it BTW I am just surprised.

 

[Ramy]

I am totally confused now. i did not think that there was a bandwidth problem for audio using either digital coax or optical cables. I thought that for audio they were equivalent to HDMI.

I am not questioning it BTW I am just surprised.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI"]HDMI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:HDMI_Logo.svg" class="image"><img alt="The HDMI logo with the word HDMI in a large font at the top with the term spelled out below in a smaller font as High-Definition Multimedia Interface. A trademark logo is to the right of HDMI." src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e2/HDMI_Logo.svg/300px-HDMI_Logo.svg.png"@@AMEPARAM@@commons/thumb/e/e2/HDMI_Logo.svg/300px-HDMI_Logo.svg.png[/ame]

Search the page for lossless and it will tell you why those cables won't work.

 

[Peter Parker]

I see four references to lossless audio but each seems to discuss HDMI and lossless audio it does not seem to makea comparison to other cables. But I am not questioning you.


But we are getting pretty far from the topic of the thread. I apologize for contributing tho the trend.

 

[raoul5788]

I just got a new Samsung LED tv, and the BB guy tried to get me to buy a 80$ four foot cable, stating that other HDMIs wouldnt be able to handle the refresh rate.... I hate BB.

I think I would be having a conversation with the store manager in a case like this. If I got not satisfaction (my apologies to Mick Jagger), I would be contacting a district manager.

 

[teachsac]

I think I would be having a conversation with the store manager in a case like this. If I got not satisfaction (my apologies to Mick Jagger), I would be contacting a district manager.

That'll do absolutely no good. They're the ones that push it. They have to show profit margins to corporate. There is little margin nowadays on TVs, BD players, etc. It all comes from accessories.

S~

 

[navychop]

Optical cables were part of a system (TOSLINK - S/PDIF) designed long ago, when (1.5 or 3.1 Mbps?) was considered "fast enough." Whether optical or coax, same specs. Optical cables can physically carry much more, but the software limits them considerably.

 

[raoul5788]

That'll do absolutely no good. They're the ones that push it. They have to show profit margins to corporate. There is little margin nowadays on TVs, BD players, etc. It all comes from accessories.

S~

Did you see the second part of my post? Profit margins are one thing, outright deceit is another.

 

[jayn_j]

Did you see the second part of my post? Profit margins are one thing, outright deceit is another.

I think deception is part of the new associate basic training. I suppose if you made a big enough fuss, they would pay lip service to you. They might even fire the poor smuck sales droid who was told to push that cable any way he could. Next guy will be told to do the same thing.

 

[teachsac]

Not really. Not all HDMI cables are capable of passing 1080p/24. That is why with some cheapo cables you get sparklies, etc. CL2 cables can. They are trying to sell a cable they know will work. Not saying it's right, but that is the nature of businesses. Buyers need to be smart.

S~

 

[tigerfan33]

I have a $30 fifty ft. and also $25 thirty five ft. hdmi cables for two different systems. My 50ft. is on a hdmi splitter ($25) and no problems at all.

 

[teachsac]

As long as it is certified there is no problem. I have a 35ft cable that was inexpensive, but it is certified. Some non-certified cables will work, also. Some won't. Remember, HDMi testing is not currently done at 1080p. If anyone wants, I have a 4ft non-certified cable that doesn't work with any of my BD, players (works fine with my 622).

S~

 

[jayn_j]

Why when looking at DISH network using HDMI cable the picture is smaller than when viewing using regular RCA type line connections?

Wow, a zombie thread rises out of the grave!

The problem with the DISH receiver is likely a configuration issue. We need to know the model # of the dish receiver and the TV to give specific advice. Also, are you trying to receive an HD signal?

You need to make sure that the DISH receiver has the setting for TV type set to 16:9 and the output resolution to either auto, 720p or 1080i. The TV should also be handling screensize on HD material automatically. For SD material, there are various zoom modes available.

Sometimes an SD station will letterbox widescreen material, and if the zoom mode is set to normal (where you would normally have black or gray bars on the sides), you will see a small 16:9 image inside the larger screen. This can be fixed by changing the mode to zoom. However, you need to remember to change it back for normal SD material or the tops and bottoms will be cut off.

 

[jayn_j]

A zombie thread is one that hasn't seen a new post in a long time and which suddenly re-appears, usually with something out of context.

The DISH 612 also has a setting to change the aspect ratio it outputs. Been awhile since I had a 622, but look for it in the menus.