Is there a difference in HDMI cables?

tonyb

Eh Fox, you know the score. Those that have learned how to listen for a living are still suffering the placebo effect....according to some anyway.

Jhayman

What I would like to know is how does Audioquest know how the song is supposed to sound, did they write it no.
Therefore how oes one determine how exactly is a song supposed to sound exactly as the artist intended.
Did the artist use Audioquest cables and mics and Vodka cables?
We listen to music day in and day out sometimes critically but do we actually know exactly how it's supposed to sound, I'm guessing only the artist can verify if these Vodka cables actually do his music justice or if he hears it changeling things that he did not intend.
I'm only asking because I don't know, how do we know the "drastic" improvment the cable causes is what the artist music is missing and not just adding something into the music because they Audioquest think they are correct?
I saw DSkip posting about Tool I believe the song 10,000 day wings part 2' he said he now hears the thunder coming over head, when I listen to it I hear the thunder coming from a distance in front of me then as the song progresses it gets closer and closer till it raining and overhead, very cool..
Who's correct only Tool can answer that right?
Everybody is different and has certain preferences when they listen to music after all it's all in your head..

mantis

kuntasensei wrote: »

Yeah, and if the decoding in the TVs worked as HDMI LLC wanted them to, none of those things would happen. TV manufacturers seem to have allowed a looser threshold for failure than the specs call for.


I think the thing people fail to understand (in general and in this thread) is that HDMI isn't a video or audio cable... it's a DATA cable, like you have in your network or inside your computer going to your hard drive. It bears many similarities to the SATA interface for hard drives. Having a better cable on your hard drive isn't going to improve the data that it receives so long as it's working in the first place, just like a better network cable isn't going to change your data along the way somehow.

I'm with you on wanting something like 10BaseT instead. With gigabit ethernet already being a known entity as far as cable lengths go, I'm not sure why that's not PLENTY of bandwidth for 4k video. I'm not that familiar with Thunderbolt as far as what lengths of cable you can reach without corruption, but the bandwidth is mighty impressive.

The one thing you didn't mention here is HDMI cables do make a considerable difference. Proper build quality , Geometry , termination and high quality materials will yield more consistent results. Lower end cables fail , don't do well with log runs etc. But once you achieve the goal properly , nothing more can be done. This is 100% true of all cables analog or digital.

mantis

Inspector 24 wrote: »

I run a 3' HDMI to the Reciever, 3' HDMI to the Balun, through 30' Cat5, and another 3' HDMI cable, and I can't honestly say I've noticed a difference in PQ from when I had a 20' run of HDMI straight from the BRP to the PJ, other than a slight flicker when the fridge downstairs turns on and off.

Does that mean anything?

:razz:

Yes it does , you should have a dedicated circuit for your equipment , your causing internal Brown outs in your own house. it will wear your gear out over time or could cause failure.

mantis

BlueFox wrote: »

In April 2013 issue of the absolute sound they are covering the 2013 Consumer Electronic Show that manufacturers use to demo their new gear. On page 76 they talk about Ethernet cables and how the new AudioQuest Vodka Ethernet cables provide a "drastic" improvement.

"You don't know how much you are missing in naturalness, detail, and focus until you replace your stock Ethernet cable with a good one like the Vodka."

Price is $250/meter

My Boss did the demo and heard a difference. He said " I can't believe my own ears that a Ethernet cable can make any audible changes ". He is a long time Audiophile and has experienced extremely high end gear over many generations and has a very credible opinion , I want to hear it for myself as I was on the fence with this finding. But In a network , there is much traffic. With computers they do error correction and it's most of the time not live streaming. With better Ethernet cables , you have better bandwidth. I build Ethernet cables all the time and I'm considering doing a Cat 5 Cat 5e and Cat6 shootout in my own system. My house is currently all wired in cat5e but I can easily change that to cat6 or Cat7 which is what Audioquest uses. It is supposed to have much better bandwidth then cat6 so giving one the ability to not have the cable restrict the signal in any way. We are getting in some Audioquest Ethernet cables and I will also be bringing them home for demo. If they make a audible difference , I'll rewire my entire network including all hardwire connection with Audioquest cat7.

mantis

Jhayman wrote: »

What I would like to know is how does Audioquest know how the song is supposed to sound, did they write it no.
Therefore how oes one determine how exactly is a song supposed to sound exactly as the artist intended.
Did the artist use Audioquest cables and mics and Vodka cables?
We listen to music day in and day out sometimes critically but do we actually know exactly how it's supposed to sound, I'm guessing only the artist can verify if these Vodka cables actually do his music justice or if he hears it changeling things that he did not intend.
I'm only asking because I don't know, how do we know the "drastic" improvment the cable causes is what the artist music is missing and not just adding something into the music because they Audioquest think they are correct?
I saw DSkip posting about Tool I believe the song 10,000 day wings part 2' he said he now hears the thunder coming over head, when I listen to it I hear the thunder coming from a distance in front of me then as the song progresses it gets closer and closer till it raining and overhead, very cool..
Who's correct only Tool can answer that right?
Everybody is different and has certain preferences when they listen to music after all it's all in your head..

You are missing the entire point of having good quality cables anywhere in your system. It's not about how it's supposed to sound and making the cables to make the sound sound exactly how it was recorded , it's about preserving the signal so it can play exactly how it was recorded. If you use cable A and it sounds one way and cable B sounds another , something in one of the cables is not doing it's job correctly. These Network cables could possibly be bull or they could retain the signal perfectly. I know for a fact not all ethernet cables are the same as they test differently. I'm well trained in Audioquest and I know for a fact they are super anal about everything they build. All of their cables are built to the highest standard. It's a reason why all of their entry level cables are fantastic.

Devlon

Oppo ships HDMI cables free with their BD players. What is the quality/brand of those cables?

Devlon

Just looked at Oppo's site. No brand listed on their HDMI cables. The cable that is included with their players sells for 10.00 separately in their accessories section. Logic: Being that Oppo is a world renowned BD manufacturer does it make sense that they would include a HDMI cable that would be sub-par to the quality standards needed for their players?

Devlon

kuntasensei wrote: »

I'm pretty sure Toshiba always knew the issues with TOSlink (as did audiophiles familiar with DACs) since it was subject to the same issues as early fiber-optic data transmission, regardless of what "they" may have thought. The difference is that S/PDIF and TOSlink don't have the robust error-rejection that HDMI has built into it at the interface level. It simply has DATA and CLOCK to try and correct for jitter, and when the quality of the cable was poor enough that it couldn't align the two, you got audible errors when the DAC did its conversion. Fortunately, HDMI doesn't have that issue because it's "all-or-nothing" nature is built-in by design.

kuntasensei, this is indirectly related to the the HDMI cable discussion, but I wanted to get your, or anyone elses opinion for that matter, on another aspect of HDMI (Mod feel free to move this discussion if needed). I am currently using a laptop as a music server with its HDMI OUT going directly to HDMI IN on my Sherwood R-972. No DAC inbetween. It sounds incredibly good just going direct like this. Based on what you said above, is there something inherent in this HDMI hookup that is correcting for jitter then? If so, how does this compare to using a DAC with Asynchronous USB that controls jitter? Also then, why do DACS not have HDMI implementation?

F1nut

Devlon wrote: »

Just looked at Oppo's site. No brand listed on their HDMI cables. The cable that is included with their players sells for 10.00 separately in their accessories section. Logic: Being that Oppo is a world renowned BD manufacturer does it make sense that they would include a HDMI cable that would be sub-par to the quality standards needed for their players?

Do you also believe that the generic power cord or patch cords that come with some gear are as good as it gets?

Devlon

You didn't answer the question which required only a simple "yes" or "no" answer.....or, possibly "maybe" if you weren't sure, lol! For simplicities sake let's put it like this: If you were the CEO of Oppo would you purposefully make the decision to include an audio accessory that you knew would compromise the audio/video capability of your products? (yes or no?) If you were the CEO of Mercedes would you purposely make the decision to put tires on your automobiles that you knew would compromise the quality of the ride? (yes or no?) I do believe that Oppo knows more about cables, and that Mercedes knows more about tires than you or I? Do I believe that generic anything is as good as it gets? Funny! Is this a trick question? Lol! Do I believe that world renowned high profile manufacturers of anything know when it is not an improvement to include a more expensive component? Give the choices of answering "yes" or "no" I answer.....hmmmm? Let me think on that and get back to ya! Lol! Goodnight Everybody!

disneyjoe7

Devlon wrote: »

You didn't answer the question which required only a simple "yes" or "no" answer.....or, possibly "maybe" if you weren't sure, lol! For simplicities sake let's put it like this: If you were the CEO of Oppo would you purposefully make the decision to include an audio accessory that you knew would compromise the audio/video capability of your products? (yes or no?) If you were the CEO of Mercedes would you purposely make the decision to put tires on your automobiles that you knew would compromise the quality of the ride? (yes or no?) I do believe that Oppo knows more about cables, and that Mercedes knows more about tires than you or I? Do I believe that generic anything is as good as it gets? Funny! Is this a trick question? Lol! Do I believe that world renowned high profile manufacturers of anything know when it is not an improvement to include a more expensive component? Give the choices of answering "yes" or "no" I answer.....hmmmm? Let me think on that and get back to ya! Lol! Goodnight Everybody!

Do you believe every manufacturer decision of anything is done purely for intended purpose? You have to be kidding if you think there's nothing better then what came with said item.

ZLTFUL

Do you think NASA would put the safety of their astronauts in question? I mean they use the best quality parts at the lowest possible cost.
Manufacturers like Oppo and Mercedes are in the business of making money. Mercedes, like every other auto manufacturer outside of the ultra-niche market boutique brands will always use the best possible compromise of cost, reliability and performance whether it be tires or belts or brake pads or any other wear part for that matter.
Same goes with Oppo. They are shipping a product that can be used out of the box. There is no need for their cables to be the best of the best. But if the customer so chooses, they can swap out the cheap cable in the box for something "better". Just like the guy who just bought the S600 can decide he would rather have the Pirelli PZeros vs the stock tires the car shipped with.

tonyb

Whatever manufacturers include with their products doesn't mean it's the best available. They have profit margins and price points to meet. If a power cord didn't matter, every manufacturer would hard wire them and not go to the expense of adding the ability to swap them out.

Car tires are the same. Mercedes puts a good all around tire on their cars. Best...no, because again whats best is subjective. Maybe you like a softer ride, or a stiffer one for taking corners.

Audio is a subjective process so it makes sense to let people have the ability to pick or taylor their sound to their liking.

mrbigbluelight

Devlon wrote: »

For simplicities sake let's put it like this: If you were the CEO of Oppo would you purposefully make the decision to include an audio accessory that you knew would compromise the audio/video capability of your products? (yes or no?)

Yes.
But that's a poorly worded question, IMO. A straw dog, of sorts, by the use of the perjorative word "compromise".

The CEO of Oppo has many considerations when designing a product for sale. It all boils down to what is the threshold level for "Good Enough" to maintain brand integrity, sustain sales, and still make an acceptable profit.

The CEO of Colby/SoundDesign/Magnavox has a different threshold, IMO.
"Did it catch on fire when you plugged it in ? No ? Good !".
And the market they target knows and/or doesn't care about the level of performance they get with that brand.
Pure price point. Is it cheap ? If "Yes", then the threshold level has been met.

Oppo, targets an audience with a little fatter wallet.
They know and expect a higher level of performance, to a certain degree based upon brand recognition.
Price point and performance are both considerations at this level.
The threshold level is higher.

Moving up the food chain, the threshold level rises dramatically in price and to a diminishing degree, IMO, performance.
Absolute performance is the determinant at this level, with price being almost a side note.
The threshold is much higher.

The CEO of Oppo determines where a product will fall between these two extremes. When successful, he is able to meet his target audience's performance expectations and price point while sustaining acceptable corporate profits.

So, in all aspects and all ways, the CEO of Oppo daily makes "compromises" that he knows affects the quality of his products. His job is to insure that the "Good Enough" threshold for the Oppo brand is met.

Devlon wrote:

If you were the CEO of Mercedes would you purposely make the decision to put tires on your automobiles that you knew would compromise the quality of the ride? (yes or no?)

Yes. See above.

Devlon wrote:

I do believe that Oppo knows more about cables, and that Mercedes knows more about tires than you or I?

I should certainly hope so (although there are exceptions here on CP in both cases)
I also know, however, that they have to know more about the ENTIRE manufacturing/sales process and the necessary art of "compromise" that is involved than some of us. (SEE ABOVE ... AGAIN)

Devlon wrote:

Give the choices of answering "yes" or "no" I answer.....hmmmm? Let me think on that and get back to ya! Lol! Goodnight Everybody!

Well, when you get off the fence post, let us know your answer.

mrbigbluelight

ZLTFUL wrote: »

Do you think NASA would put the safety of their astronauts in question?

Off topic, but yes.

ZLTFUL

mrbigbluelight wrote: »

Off topic, but yes.

Off topic, yes but on point. Point being that ALL manufacturers, whether it be NASA suppliers or the Sanyo BDP Joe Smith just bought have certain price points that they have to meet to remain competitive and still turn a profit.
In fact, you outlined my exact point in your previous post. The NASA example being that the shuttles were built by the lowest bidder. Meaning they met certain standards and at the lowest possible price point. Not too much different from the balancing act that consumer manufacturers make when bringing products to market every single day.

Devlon

Ok, ok I never particularly liked Merry-Go-Rounds, so give me some advice here, lol. What is hard for me to understand is when on both the $10 generic HDMI cable and the 130.00 HDMI Cable (Audioquest Chocolate) state very similar info that says they support 3D Technology, 4K, Ethernet Channel, Audio Return Channel, 1440p and 1080p FullHD Resolution, Transfer Rates of At Least 10.2 Gbps / 340 MHz, 48-Bit Deep Color, HDCP Compliant, and True HD-Dolby 7.1 , etc. What difference will I hear and see on the cable that's 120.00 more? At what price point does the law of diminishing returns zero put? I am willing to try as an experiment in buying just one HQ HDMI cable to see/hear what the difference is. I prefer not to spend 120.00 just to see though unless it makes that much of a difference. Which cable/price point upgrade do you guys think will give me the best audio/visual difference for the money?

Devlon

zero out I meant to say

ZLTFUL

The biggest reason I went to Audioquest Forests ($60 for the 3m cable and $28 each for the 1m ones) is materials.

The cheap cables I had (even the ones with the "gold plated" ends) were all tin or steel conductors.
The Audioquest are copper.
For me, it was peace of mind more than anything. Especially as often as I switch out gear it seems. Hehe.

jeremymarcinko

I shamelessly use a no name 25' HDMI from cabletrain.com only cost me 30 bucks. Been working flawlessly for 3 years. Staying blissfully ignorant saves me lots of coin!!

headrott

Devlon wrote: »

Ok, ok I never particularly liked Merry-Go-Rounds, so give me some advice here, lol. What is hard for me to understand is when on both the $10 generic HDMI cable and the 130.00 HDMI Cable (Audioquest Chocolate) state very similar info that says they support 3D Technology, 4K, Ethernet Channel, Audio Return Channel, 1440p and 1080p FullHD Resolution, Transfer Rates of At Least 10.2 Gbps / 340 MHz, 48-Bit Deep Color, HDCP Compliant, and True HD-Dolby 7.1 , etc. What difference will I hear and see on the cable that's 120.00 more? At what price point does the law of diminishing returns zero put? I am willing to try as an experiment in buying just one HQ HDMI cable to see/hear what the difference is. I prefer not to spend 120.00 just to see though unless it makes that much of a difference. Which cable/price point upgrade do you guys think will give me the best audio/visual difference for the money?

You need to look at the quality of componnents that you will be hooking up this higher quality HDMI cably to. Obviously, you don't want a super high quality HDMI cable hooked up to an "entry level" BD player, receiver and display. You potentially will never see/hear the benefits of the high quality HDMI cable. You need to buy an HDMI cable with an equivalent quality as the components you are hooking it up to.

Also, comparing the two HDMI cables above. (As I stated earlier in the thread) there is a MINIMUM level of standards that need to be met to have the HDMI cable meet all the cable specifications you listed above (4K, deep color, 3D, etc.etc.etc) but the more expensive cable above is potentially able to meet and greatly exceed these minimum levels. This cable excels because of superior components (including metal(s), dialectric(s), geometry, build quality, etc.) and this is the same reason the cable costs more. It has superior components in it compared to the cheap cable. Also, the more expensive cable took more money to design.

ALL212

BlueFox wrote: »

In April 2013 issue of the absolute sound they are covering the 2013 Consumer Electronic Show that manufacturers use to demo their new gear. On page 76 they talk about Ethernet cables and how the new AudioQuest Vodka Ethernet cables provide a "drastic" improvement.

"You don't know how much you are missing in naturalness, detail, and focus until you replace your stock Ethernet cable with a good one like the Vodka."

Price is $250/meter

I've been saving this post for a "worthy" cause - it's number 100 and only took me about 6 years to get here. I am in the networking industry - I've worked cat3 through cat6 wire but let's keep it easy - cat 5, 5e and 6. I'm not going to go nuts here but there is a drastic difference in each of these cables. There is also a drastic difference in the material's of these and the material is not isolated to the particular Cat#. You can get great copper/diaelectric in a Cat5 wire and nasty wire in a Cat6 (although not as common as Cat5e). If you take apart each of those types from the same vendor and look closely you'll see differences in the twist ratio and positioning at the connector. All of this to make a cleaner signal so that you can push faster data rates through them.

I run Cat6 wire whenever possible. Is a chunk of Cat6 worth $250/meter? Not likely. Is a chunk of cat6 going to transmit a cleaner signal (and therefore not required to retransmit based on tcp/ip standards - read slower data rate) than cat5. Yep. That you could potentially "hear". TCP/IP would not retransmit bad packets as often (or at all) and you should get a better analog signal as it is getting to the opamp in the correct order quicker.

And F1's Kool-aid is some of the best kool-aid I've ever had.

100!!!

heiney9

I have heard differences in many types of cables. I can only reason it would be possible to hear/see differences in ALL cables. That doesn't mean every person in every scenario with every cable will hear a difference, but to my ears it has been possible more often than not. The best way to find out is to try it for yourself.

H9

ALL212

heiney9 wrote: »

I have heard differences in many types of cables. I can only reason it would be possible to hear/see differences in ALL cables. That doesn't mean every person in every scenario with every cable will hear a difference, but to my ears it has been possible more often than not. The best way to find out is to try it for yourself.

H9

What?! I understood that - I have no argument with that.

Must have passed on and not even noticed...:cheesygrin:

heiney9

ALL212 wrote: »

What?! I understood that - I have no argument with that.

Must have passed on and not even noticed...:cheesygrin:

It's the 100 post thing............now every post makes sense and is agreeable :cool:

Your probation period is complete

H9

Devlon

ALL212 wrote: »

I've been saving this post for a "worthy" cause - it's number 100 and only took me about 6 years to get here. I am in the networking industry - I've worked cat3 through cat6 wire but let's keep it easy - cat 5, 5e and 6. I'm not going to go nuts here but there is a drastic difference in each of these cables. There is also a drastic difference in the material's of these and the material is not isolated to the particular Cat#. You can get great copper/diaelectric in a Cat5 wire and nasty wire in a Cat6 (although not as common as Cat5e). If you take apart each of those types from the same vendor and look closely you'll see differences in the twist ratio and positioning at the connector. All of this to make a cleaner signal so that you can push faster data rates through them.

I run Cat6 wire whenever possible. Is a chunk of Cat6 worth $250/meter? Not likely. Is a chunk of cat6 going to transmit a cleaner signal (and therefore not required to retransmit based on tcp/ip standards - read slower data rate) than cat5. Yep. That you could potentially "hear". TCP/IP would not retransmit bad packets as often (or at all) and you should get a better analog signal as it is getting to the opamp in the correct order quicker.

And F1's Kool-aid is some of the best kool-aid I've ever had.

100!!!

ALL212, first of all congrats on post number 100! Yahoo! I find you post informative. It is interesting to hear a viewpoint from someone in a parallel industry so to speak as it relates to cables. Do you have any required reading/studying in your industry concerning cable design and construction? I think that would be fascinating reading.

Devlon

"TCP/IP would not retransmit bad packets as often (or at all) and you should get a better analog signal as it is getting to the opamp in the correct order quicker."

Wow, it sounds like a description of jitter? I never thought about that outside of audio transmission

ALL212

Devlon wrote: »

ALL212, first of all congrats on post number 100! Yahoo! I find you post informative. It is interesting to hear a viewpoint from someone in a parallel industry so to speak as it relates to cables. Do you have any required reading/studying in your industry concerning cable design and construction? I think that would be fascinating reading.

Start with a lite study of TCP/IP - would apply to those of us using squeezeboxes and other networkable media players including wireless. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite
Head down to the transport layer description and there you will find the portion that could retransmit.

Wiring specs at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Ethernet_cables. Note the cat5 standard had NO crosstalk specifications. And check out the list of insulations you can use!

They also note that there is solid and stranded available.

Just as with any other wire - speaker, interconnect, power etc., you can also have different grades of network wire.

The TCP/IP part applies ONLY if you use your home network to send music to your system.

Oh - and don't go down to the box store and pay $20 for a 6 foot cat6 wire. If you don't have a local supplier get it on line. As with the rest of the components you can buy there are places that will take your money and laugh all the way to the bank!

Jhayman

All212..
$20 is to cheap for a 6f cat6 cable?
If so how much is a 6F worth?
Now the actual RJ-45 connector at both ends, I'm guessing it does not matter about the quality of it because it's only the wires touching inside the female end correct?