I love puppies, do you?

shack

TECHNOKID wrote: »

From my personal encounter with Crutshfield, I have high respect for the men and I would tend to believe he hires people that would represent his own beliefs and would typically have the same integrity that he has thus I believe what the CSR would have told you would typically be what Crustshfield as a company would believe (otherwise, a man that doesn't represent a company's belief should be fired).

Which is why I suggested the OP call and talk to Mr. Crutchfield and ask if he knows what his sales reps are telling customers.

I may send them an email myself and direct him to this thread. It may be of interest to the him and his company. I mean if the companies they represent are scamming the consumer I think he would want to know about it. Maybe his sales rep will enlighten him to the scam. Usually when they talk to you they give you their name. Maybe the OP will post that here so Mr. Crutchfield will know who to ask about the problem.

mantis

digitalvideo wrote: »

The question yet to be answered is:

"What is the difference between a $400 dollar HDMI cable or a $4 dollar HDMI cable if both cables are HDMI Certified 1.3a Category 2 and have the same wall thickness on the outside?"

But you will most likely never know that you are not getting the best picture possible unless you see a category 1 cable side by side next to a category 2 cable. It is even more critical to buy Category 2 cables for PS3 gamers because of the deep color capabilities of PS3.

The critical standard to look for in an HDMI cable is HDMI certification to Category 2 (High Speed) standards. Alot of emphasis is put on whether cables are version 1.3 or not, but any cable that is certified and has been manufactured in the past 3 years will in fact be version 1.3 because the 1.2 revision is almost 3 years old. So it is not the version (1.2 or 1.3) that is critical. It is the speed rating that makes the difference. It is far more important that the cable is certified "category 2".

Category 1 cables are tested up to 75MHz while Category 2 cables are tested to 340MHz. According to the HDMI website, Category 1 cables may give you 1080P, but they are not guaranteed to do so. Category 1 are only guaranteed up to 1080i resolution. Only Category 2 cables are guaranteed to give 1080P FullHD.

In addition , category 2 cables are high-speed cables and according to the HDMI website, they are required not only to guarantee 1080P but also for 120Hz refresh rates and deep color.

That's something Monster and AudioQuest don't tell you, they want to make you think the price is the determining factor in a wires function when it's not.

Can everyone take a breath and talk about this or does everyone want to point fingers and act like a bunch of retards???

If anyone is interested , I can lay this thread to rest. I know a lot about cables in general and a lot about HDMI. I can tell you all you need to know when you want to purchase these cables. I can tell you why cable companies tell you there cables are better then others even HDMI.

When everyone is ready to listen, I'll post,

Dan

cnh

Just a stupid question. Don't you think you'd be able to tell whether a category 1 cable were giving you 1080p or not. Also, don't a lot of Blu-ray players, PS3 included actually test to see if they can output at 1080p?

Agreed there are differences in cable 'speed' that come into play or not depending on the video signal. I don't think you need 2 (as you admit) to get a standard 1080p blu-ray picture. It is also my understanding that the 'newer' standards you are referring to are mostly not available on most equipment at this stage?

I have no stake in this. So I'm ready to read Dan (Mantis's) post.

later..

cnh

sucks2beme

I don't think HMDI i(digital)s as critical as analog cables. Good enough is
good enough. I've not noticed a difference with HMDI, but interconnects and
speaker cables, yes. As far as the phone jockey at Crutchfield,
he's what he is. A guy that answers the phone.

We don't like monster because it's a very poor value for the money. Nobody here is in anyone's pocket. We also have a couple of pro installers here. They go with what works. More $$$ isn't always better.
You're being slammed for making a poor general statement. Kinda like posting what's on the bathroom wall. Do your own test.

Somebody is always coming here to tell us we don't know jack. Yet,
we seem to have a lot of people with great sounding system and experienced
answers to questions. Believe me. We are always looking for a value in
cables. IF cheap was always best, we'd be on it. If a cheap HMDI worked
for you, then fine. I wouldn't notice a good/bad HMDI, since I don't
watch TV or listen to 5.1 music. I do here the difference in I/C and spekaer cables on the 2 channel.

suprafantx

mantis wrote: »

When everyone is ready to listen, I'll post,

Dan

Then post, I am ready.
Thanks for sharing

digitalvideo

sucks2beme wrote: »

I don't think HMDI i(digital)s as critical as analog cables. Good enough is
good enough. I've not noticed a difference with HMDI, but interconnects and
speaker cables, yes. As far as the phone jockey at Crutchfield,
he's what he is. A guy that answers the phone.

We don't like monster because it's a very poor value for the money. Nobody here is in anyone's pocket. We also have a couple of pro installers here. They go with what works. More $$$ isn't always better.
You're being slammed for making a poor general statement. Kinda like posting what's on the bathroom wall. Do your own test.

Somebody is always coming here to tell us we don't know jack. Yet,
we seem to have a lot of people with great sounding system and experienced
answers to questions. Believe me. We are always looking for a value in
cables. IF cheap was always best, we'd be on it. If a cheap HMDI worked
for you, then fine. I wouldn't notice a good/bad HMDI, since I don't
watch TV or listen to 5.1 music. I do here the difference in I/C and spekaer cables on the 2 channel.

I didn't create this thread to attack anyone's credibility on this website or anyone's knowledge. I created this thread to share with everyone on here what a Crutchfield rep said to me and I was jumped on. I've also been into plenty of Circuit City stores (when they were in business) and Best Buy stores and also got the same advice on HDMI cables and was told that I didn't need a $100 dollar HDMI cable, but of course some of the salesmen act like sleazy car salesmen and will feed you a bunch of b.s. sort of like when I was told by a Circuit City sales rep that the lower end Panasonic plasmas are superior in every way over the Pioneer Elite Kuro plasmas and how Sony is all over priced mediocre lcd's and the Samsung's are all better, stuff like that. But since that Crutchfield rep didn't try to sell me the most expensive wire from the wire company that works with Crutchfield told me he was being sincere because he could have been a typical scumbag and told me that I should go with the $400 HDMI cable "because it will give you superior picture clarity and it's a huge difference." which he didn't do.

This thread is NOT some sort of Crutchfield advertisement. I think there are plenty of other distributor outlets that have a larger selection for better cheaper prices.

TheMARPATNinja7

shack wrote: »

Since when is a Crutchfield customer rep an EXPERT. I smell **** here.

Theres a reason why Crutchfield has some of the best and most respected customer service in the consumer electronic world. Most of the reps are experts not to a specific product but to a specific area (i.e. Home Theatre, Car Audio, etc) and when you contact their CC it directs you to an expert on whichever area you have a question with. It seemed like this guy threw out a topic for discussion and just got the hell flamed out of him. I'm not taking sides on this topic though, just observing and trying to keep this fair.

mantis

suprafantx wrote: »

Then post, I am ready.
Thanks for sharing

First off I'm embarrassed on how a lot of people get treated around here. People around here are to damn defensive. back off guys!!!!!:mad:

So the thread starter had a experience and expressed how he felt about it. Nothing wrong with that. Calling Monster and Audioquest scams is alittle over the top but why not talk about it.

So now I will voice what I know about HDMI. it doesn't matter who made the cables, it doesn't matter what they made it out of, it can be peanut butter inside a tube with snake oil with HDMI connectors and if it can pass the signal correctly at the correct speed and bandwidth required for transmission, thats all that matters.
So with that being said, if you have 1080i or 720p then your system requires class 1 cables which have the ability to pass that resolution video plus 8 channels of uncompressed audio. It can go up to 45 to 50 feet then needs to be repeated. So lets say your Cablebox VIA HDMI is sent to your receiver over a 4 meter cable which is around 13.3 feet or so. Then the receiver sends out the video to the display over a 45 foot HDMI cable. The display wants 720p , the cablebox sends it 720p, the receiver repeats the signal and makes sure the necessary 5 volts are there so the signal is in tact. There is nothing to make better here. As long as the cable can do the job right, price means nothing. If the 30 dollar cable can do this without flaw, then the cable is no worse then a 500 dollar cable. There is nothing the 500.00 cable can do better here if they both pass HDMI standards for the task at hand.
The same goes with 1080p. You need a class 2 or high speed cable with HDMI certified for that. Once it passes, there is nothing more to do. You can't make it better. It has to pass the signal. If it can't ,then again price has nothing to do with it.

This holds very true for all digital cables. As long as the cable can pass the signal correctly, then there is nothing to make better.

To many people get caught up in cables. Yes analog cables sound different and so does speaker cables. I have conducted enough tests myself to proof to myself I can hear differences in these cables. But digital cable I only once heard a difference and it was a very long time ago and it was a cheap optical cable that came with Mitsubishi DSS HD receivers. It was very thin and I don't think it passed the signal correctly. It made a cd player sound thin and weak. The audio level seems lower with that cable. I tested that cable against many different brands , lengths and sources and the results where that that cable did not pass the digital signal correctly. Every other good quality cable Monster and all sounded no different coax or Optical even vs each other. Once the signal was passed, there was nothing left to improve.

I don't know why analog can't get it right. Kimber and Audioquest to me get it as close to right as I know for a reasonable price. I get so sick and tired of cables. Sounding different. You put a cable you like in one system and it sounds great, put it in another system and it sounds like ****. I don't get it.
I came up with a theory years ago that Synergy was the most important thing one can have in any system. matching up the system was key and putting into a room were it can perform well.

So back to HDMI. Monster has put things on there HDMI boxes that are not true. I proved this by talking with industry Engineers about my findings. i have also learned from HDMI themselves about HDMI and whats required. I even know whats to come with Networking and control over HDMI. There are some very cool things going on.

So for the person who started this thread, I'm not happy with how the Crutchfield phone tech talked to you. As I agree with some of the things he said, I 'm not happy with his inability to be professional. I see it a lot in our business. People form these ridiculous opinions and think they are true.

I will gladly help anyone with any wire based question. If your looking for HDMI cables, I can help.

Dan

digitalvideo

mantis wrote: »

First off I'm embarrassed on how a lot of people get treated around here. People around here are to damn defensive. back off guys!!!!!:mad:

So the thread starter had a experience and expressed how he felt about it. Nothing wrong with that. Calling Monster and Audioquest scams is alittle over the top but why not talk about it.

So now I will voice what I know about HDMI. it doesn't matter who made the cables, it doesn't matter what they made it out of, it can be peanut butter inside a tube with snake oil with HDMI connectors and if it can pass the signal correctly at the correct speed and bandwidth required for transmission, thats all that matters.
So with that being said, if you have 1080i or 720p then your system requires class 1 cables which have the ability to pass that resolution video plus 8 channels of uncompressed audio. It can go up to 45 to 50 feet then needs to be repeated. So lets say your Cablebox VIA HDMI is sent to your receiver over a 4 meter cable which is around 13.3 feet or so. Then the receiver sends out the video to the display over a 45 foot HDMI cable. The display wants 720p , the cablebox sends it 720p, the receiver repeats the signal and makes sure the necessary 5 volts are there so the signal is in tact. There is nothing to make better here. As long as the cable can do the job right, price means nothing. If the 30 dollar cable can do this without flaw, then the cable is no worse then a 500 dollar cable. There is nothing the 500.00 cable can do better here if they both pass HDMI standards for the task at hand.
The same goes with 1080p. You need a class 2 or high speed cable with HDMI certified for that. Once it passes, there is nothing more to do. You can't make it better. It has to pass the signal. If it can't ,then again price has nothing to do with it.

This holds very true for all digital cables. As long as the cable can pass the signal correctly, then there is nothing to make better.

To many people get caught up in cables. Yes analog cables sound different and so does speaker cables. I have conducted enough tests myself to proof to myself I can hear differences in these cables. But digital cable I only once heard a difference and it was a very long time ago and it was a cheap optical cable that came with Mitsubishi DSS HD receivers. It was very thin and I don't think it passed the signal correctly. It made a cd player sound thin and weak. The audio level seems lower with that cable. I tested that cable against many different brands , lengths and sources and the results where that that cable did not pass the digital signal correctly. Every other good quality cable Monster and all sounded no different coax or Optical even vs each other. Once the signal was passed, there was nothing left to improve.

I don't know why analog can't get it right. Kimber and Audioquest to me get it as close to right as I know for a reasonable price. I get so sick and tired of cables. Sounding different. You put a cable you like in one system and it sounds great, put it in another system and it sounds like ****. I don't get it.
I came up with a theory years ago that Synergy was the most important thing one can have in any system. matching up the system was key and putting into a room were it can perform well.

So back to HDMI. Monster has put things on there HDMI boxes that are not true. I proved this by talking with industry Engineers about my findings. i have also learned from HDMI themselves about HDMI and whats required. I even know whats to come with Networking and control over HDMI. There are some very cool things going on.

So for the person who started this thread, I'm not happy with how the Crutchfield phone tech talked to you. As I agree with some of the things he said, I 'm not happy with his inability to be professional. I see it a lot in our business. People form these ridiculous opinions and think they are true.

I will gladly help anyone with any wire based question. If your looking for HDMI cables, I can help.

Dan

Your post was very informative, thanks for posting it. I have to disagree on the Crutchfield rep being unprofessional, he was very helpful and polite and answered all my questions, and didn't try to get me to buy anything, we spoke for a close 40 minutes. He pretty much said everything on the phone that you posted above. Should have I posted 40 minutes worth of convo on a post? I tried to keep it as simple as possible.

When it comes to HDMI wire brands I have used and the image quality between them I haven't noticed any difference personally.

Speaker wire on the other hand is a different story. I personally believe in spending much more on a good speaker wire and sub wire.

TECHNOKID

I'm just trying to get a handle on this debate. Because I'm with everyone on there being a REAL difference in cabling. I'm not sure about HDMIs though?

One thing that was mentioned is that HDMI specifically wasn't mentioned in the OP subject and I do think it makes all of the difference in the world as the LCR factor in this case isn't to be considered since we are dealing with digital, not analog. Digital is 1s and 0s, it either works or it doesn't, nothing really in between.

TECHNOKID

shack wrote: »

Which is why I suggested the OP call and talk to Mr. Crutchfield and ask if he knows what his sales reps are telling customers.

I may send them an email myself and direct him to this thread. It may be of interest to the him and his company. I mean if the companies they represent are scamming the consumer I think he would want to know about it. Maybe his sales rep will enlighten him to the scam. Usually when they talk to you they give you their name. Maybe the OP will post that here so Mr. Crutchfield will know who to ask about the problem.

Agreed, I was thinking of sending an email my self as I would trust their integrity and yes, if the CSR was to represent the company in a poor manner the CEO needs to know about this.

Cheers

TECHNOKID

mantis wrote: »

Can everyone take a breath and talk about this or does everyone want to point fingers and act like a bunch of retards???

If anyone is interested , I can lay this thread to rest. I know a lot about cables in general and a lot about HDMI. I can tell you all you need to know when you want to purchase these cables. I can tell you why cable companies tell you there cables are better then others even HDMI.

When everyone is ready to listen, I'll post,

Dan

I sure would hope others are as I am willing to read anything you may have to enlighten us... afterall, isn't the role of forum to learn about this hobby and master it at the best cost possible?

mantis

TECHNOKID wrote: »

I sure would hope others are as I am willing to read anything you may have to enlighten us... afterall, isn't the role of forum to learn about this hobby and master it at the best cost possible?

Yes. I got in argument around here for years. One day I realized it was a huge waste of time and I just wanna talk about my work and hobby. And if I can learn or teach someone, thats even better.

Dan

mantis

digitalvideo wrote: »

I talked to a Crutchfield customer service rep on the phone yesterday about wires and connections and he told me the AudioQuest HDMI cables that are in their top of the line series (HDMI-3) that sell for around $400 dollars are the same cables that are in their lowest end series (HDMI-A) for $40 bucks, and in his own words: "The $400 cable is just a prettier cable on the outside, you're paying for outside cosmetics." AudioQuest has four HDMI cables in it's HDMI lineup and they are all the same, it's a complete scam and rip off.

When I asked about speaker cables he said to just go with Monster's Standard basic cable which is their cheapest one as they are all the same. I looked at BlueJeans website and their speaker cables and HDMI cables are thicker for the same price or cheaper.

When it comes to HDMI ratings the AudioQuest $400 cable is CL-3 rated and the BlueJeans HDMI cable Series-F2 is rated CM for in-wall installation (higher than the typical CL2 or CL3). So just stick to Bluejeans cables.

Audioquest does not just put better jackets on there wires and sell them for hundreds more. They make high quality cables and use high quality materials. This does not mean it is necessary to pass a pure HDMI signal. There is a lot to be said about this post.

Dan

digitalvideo

TECHNOKID wrote: »

Agreed, I was thinking of sending an email my self as I would trust their integrity and yes, if the CSR was to represent the company in a poor manner the CEO needs to know about this.

Cheers

When you say a distributor's job is to represent a company do you mean they have to **** themselves out to that company and lie for them and sell the customer something extra they truly don't need that won't make a difference?

If I was a mechanic for let's say Honda and Honda had a contract to sell "Z spark plug wires" and that brand had 5 different wires to choose from and I told the customer that his or her Honda would run better if they bought the top of the line Z wire even though they had the same internals am I representing Honda in a good manner? But one thing I am doing is a scumbag who lies to customers to make a profit which is not good practice, just ask Bernie Madoff.

I would think that Bill Crutchfield who's been in the business for 40 years knows damn well what he expects from his service reps and knows damn well that they should be honest with the customer first and I bet Bill would applaud what that service rep said to me.

TECHNOKID

Thank you for your great informative post mantis (Dan). Can you now emphasize on your original post (The why)

I can tell you why cable companies tell you there cables are better then others even HDMI.

Cheers

TECHNOKID

digitalvideo wrote: »

When you say a distributor's job is to represent a company do you mean they have to **** themselves out to that company and lie for them and sell the customer something extra they truly don't need that won't make a difference?

If I was a mechanic for let's say Honda and Honda had a contract to sell "Z spark plug wires" and that brand had 5 different wires to choose from and I told the customer that his or her Honda would run better if they bought the top of the line Z wire even though they had the same internals am I representing Honda in a good manner? But one thing I am doing is a scumbag who lies to customers to make a profit which is not good practice, just ask Bernie Madoff.

I would think that Bill Crutchfield who's been in the business for 40 years knows damn well what he expects from his service reps and knows damn well that they should be honest with the customer first and I bet Bill would applaud what that service rep said to me.

I read you... now, I also trust Crutshfield's integrity as mentioned in my previous post(s). However, business is business and if there were any chances that the CSR wasn't on the same page as the ownership (VISION) then there is 2 choices here:

1. as an employee who doesn't have the same conviction as the employer, YOU quit or...

2. As an owner that finds out that his employee doesn't see eye to eye with the business (NOT the same vision) then the employer might like to know that as he may feel he is mis-represented.

In my line of work, it was one the question I needed to clear with my employer (ownership) WHAT IS YOUR COMPANY VISION??? Honestly if the company vision wouldn't have fitted with my own vision and beliefs I COULDN'T have affordeed to STAY, I would have had to QUIT!!! This seeemed (from my understanding) Shack's main concern (which I agree with): Was the CSR actually representing Crutshfield's view on the cable? If yes, then fine otherwise, some clean-up maybe required, right?

Cheers

digitalvideo

TECHNOKID wrote: »

I read you... now, I also trust Crutshfield's integrity as mentioned in my previous post(s). However, business is business and if there were any chances that the CSR wasn't on the same page as the ownership (VISION) then there is 2 choices here:

1. as an employee who doesn't have the same conviction as the employer, YOU quit or...

2. As an owner that finds out that his employee doesn't see eye to eye with the business (NOT the same vision) then the employer might like to know that as he may feel he is mis-represented.

In my line of work, it was one the question I needed to clear with my employer (ownership) WHAT IS YOUR COMPANY VISION??? Honestly if the company vision wouldn't have fitted with my own vision and beliefs I COULDN'T have affordeed to STAY, I would have had to QUIT!!! This seeemed (from my understanding) Shack's main concern (which I agree with): Was the CSR actually representing Crutshfield's view on the cable? If yes, then fine otherwise, some clean-up maybe required, right?

Cheers

Maybe there was some miscommunication between us. I have noticed that the companies that put the customer first and are more honest and open with their customers in the long run stay out of trouble with the law and obviously have good consumer satisfaction. As I read more and more threads and posts on here and on different websites/forums and word of mouth starting to spread like wild fire about Monster cable and what they are pulling and people are catching on but sadly not fast enough as there are so many suckers out there (people who buy wire from electronic stores) instead of taking the time to educate themselves and reading about it online. But I think companies like Monster and many others that conduct themselves like them just take advantage of the ignorance of a lot of consumers especially in the LCD and Plasma market as I think most people who buy an LCD or Plasma want to go in Best Buy or Circuit City quickly and get out of there as fast as possible and they let the sales rep feed them b.s. and buy the tv run out of there, hook up their tv at home and wonder why the picture isn't as good as it was hooked up in the store. Circuit City and Best Buy employees get a commission if they sell Samsung so you might have noticed it's become quite trendy in electronic stores to bash Sony the last few years and be persuaded to buy Samsung. I was also told that the lower end Samsung LCD in 720p was better better than the Sony XBR6. I also told this story quite a few times when I was looking for a plasma about how a CC rep told me the bottom of the line Panasonic plasmas were better in ever way over the top of the line Pioneer Elite Kuro models because CC didn't carry Pioneer in that store. Go figure. But when I contacted Crutchfield last year before I bought my Pioneer I asked the service rep if I should go with LCD or Plasma and he said he personally would go with Pioneer as they have the best picture quality on the market and Crutchfield doesn't sell Pioneer.

cnh

mantis wrote: »

Audioquest does not just put better jackets on there wires and sell them for hundreds more. They make high quality cables and use high quality materials. This does not mean it is necessary to pass a pure HDMI signal. There is a lot to be said about this post.

Dan

Really Great Posts (Mantis) Dan!

I couldn't agree more with all of your posts above...you confirmed some of what I thought and extended on that. That's really what we should be doing here. Don't care for a lot of the unnecessary fencing that takes place here and there. Unfortunately that's what 'gets noticed'; what stands out, rather than all the really good posts, info and discussions that are available on this site.

Bravo...

cnh

WilliamM2

But when I contacted Crutchfield last year before I bought my Pioneer I asked the service rep if I should go with LCD or Plasma and he said he personally would go with Pioneer as they have the best picture quality on the market and Crutchfield doesn't sell Pioneer.

That's how they've stayed in business for so long, by recommending products they don't sell! Who would have thought?

Really is starting to sound like a bulls**t story.

digitalvideo

The rep actually told me the Pioneers are tops. Maybe he should lie and tell me to go with something else (even though cnet.com, ultimateavmag,com, avsforum and all the other independent sites and people who test these tv's rate the Pioneer tops.) So he didn't lie. Crutchfield does sell Pioneer electronics in other areas so they do sell Pioneer. Like I said the Crutchfield rep told me what every other independent tester has come to the same finding so I assume Bill Crutchfield doesn't want his reps to insult the intelligence of his customers.

What I don't understand is how "some" people on here find it so astounding and fascinating that there is a sales rep who is honest and doesn't act like some scumbag car salesman or real estate agent trying to sell a lemon. Yes, there are honest people out there, they do exist.

cheddar

digitalvideo wrote: »

I talked to a Crutchfield customer service rep on the phone yesterday about wires and connections and he told me the AudioQuest HDMI cables that are in their top of the line series (HDMI-3) that sell for around $400 dollars are the same cables that are in their lowest end series (HDMI-A) for $40 bucks, and in his own words: "The $400 cable is just a prettier cable on the outside, you're paying for outside cosmetics." AudioQuest has four HDMI cables in it's HDMI lineup and they are all the same, it's a complete scam and rip off.

Although I actually like Crutchfield as a place to shop, a single CSR is pretty poor evidence to support a statement that everything inside the jacket is exactly the same and "you're paying for outside cosmetics". As if audioquest is just changing the outside jacket material and colors on its entire line of cables and jacking up the price. Also "complete scam and rip off" would seem to need more support than a single CSR.

If Crutchfield really agreed with these statements, it would seem the company should have a disclaimer of some sort on its website so as not to be complicit in a scam and rip off of its customers who never talk to a rep or just stop selling the more expensive cable altogether.

As mantis explained, it's more likely that there are differences beyond the jacket, but that those differences may not make any difference in the real world experience of end users. This is very different than what the CSR said and is probably a much better starting point for a discussion of this type on hdmi cable quality differences.

digitalvideo

cheddar wrote: »

Although I actually like Crutchfield as a place to shop, a single CSR is pretty poor evidence to support a statement that everything inside the jacket is exactly the same and "you're paying for outside cosmetics". As if audioquest is just changing the outside jacket material and colors on its entire line of cables and jacking up the price. Also "complete scam and rip off" would seem to need more support than a single CSR.

If Crutchfield really agreed with these statements, it would seem the company should have a disclaimer of some sort on its website so as not to be complicit in a scam and rip off of its customers or just stop selling the more expensive cable altogether.

As mantis explained, it's more likely that there are differences beyond the jacket, but that those differences may not make any difference in the real world experience of end users. This is very different than what the CSR said and is probably a much better starting point for a discussion of this type on hdmi cable quality differences.

What I find funny is no one on here who believes in AudioQuest can prove their more expensive HDMI is different than their basic HDMI cable. My evidence is their own official website which posts the specs of each cable and they are the same.

http://www.audioquest.com/

So a company won't tell the public what the differences are in their cables other than anecdotal evidence from random people who say: "Well I noticed a bit of difference in picture quality by switching over to their top of the line model." when many others didn't even notice a difference. If there are differences in HDMI cables then why won't AudioQuest post the differences of the internals? (Because they are all the same specs) read their own website lol

digitalvideo

Again:

If I was a mechanic for let's say Honda and Honda had a contract to sell "Z spark plug wires" and that brand had 5 different wires to choose from and I told the customer that his or her Honda would run better if they bought the top of the line Z wire even though they had the same internals am I representing Honda in a good manner? But one thing I am doing is a scumbag who lies to customers to make a profit which is not good practice, just ask Bernie Madoff.

I would think that Bill Crutchfield who's been in the business for 40 years knows damn well what he expects from his service reps and knows damn well that they should be honest with the customer first and I bet Bill would applaud what that service rep said to me.

cheddar

digitalvideo wrote: »

What I find funny is no one on here who believes in AudioQuest can prove their more expensive HDMI is different than their basic HDMI cable. My evidence is their own official website which posts the specs of each cable and they are the same.

http://www.audioquest.com/

Right from their website:

AudioQuest HDMI-3 uses large 6.1% silver conductors (almost five times the silver of normal silver-plate). Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene is used to minimize loss caused by insulation, and to insure critical geometry stability.

If their high end cable uses silver and their low end doesn't, then what the rep and what you have tried to repeat here is completely untrue. There are differences beyond the jacket as conductor material is not just a cosmetic difference. Now as I've said, this difference may make no real world difference to most end users. But it completely contradicts what the CSR said and what you are trying to repeat as true, that it's just a jacket cosmetic difference. A more constructive discussion would deal with what silver does or doesn't do for a typical end user.

digitalvideo

cheddar wrote: »

Right from their website:

AudioQuest HDMI-3 uses large 6.1% silver conductors (almost five times the silver of normal silver-plate). Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene is used to minimize loss caused by insulation, and to insure critical geometry stability.

If their high end cable uses silver and their low end doesn't, then what the rep and what you have tried to repeat here is completely untrue. There are differences beyond the jacket as conductor material is not just a cosmetic difference. Now as I've said, this difference may make no real world difference to most end users. But it completely contradicts what the CSR said and what you are trying to repeat as true, that it's just a jacket cosmetic difference. A more constructive discussion would deal with what silver does or doesn't do for a typical end user.

Are you telling me that a 6.1% silver conductor on the high end HDMI cable that uses Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene that costs over $400+ dollars will make a difference over a $40 dollar cable that doesn't have a 6.1% silver conductor but still uses Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene is going to make a difference? And is that 6.1% worth $400 dollars more? LOL You got to be kidding me. I can't believe people are so desperate to defend a scam.

digitalvideo

I don't care if a company puts pure rare platinum on it's conductors and sells it for $10,000 as long a cable is 1.3a Category 2 certified by HDMI it will perform the same as a $40 dollar cable that is 1.3a Category 2 by HDMI. Maybe if I buy some Mobil 1 motor oil my car will run better than the cheaper Pennzoil oil? lol

cnh

It's unclear to me that there is any debate left here? I think Dan was quite balanced and gracious in his discussion (IMHO).

cnh

F1nut

I can't believe people are so desperate to defend a scam.

Good gawd, let it go. You're as annoying as they come.

wizzy

digitalvideo wrote: »

Are you telling me that a 6.1% silver conductor on the high end HDMI cable that uses Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene that costs over $400+ dollars will make a difference over a $40 dollar cable that doesn't have a 6.1% silver conductor but still uses Skin/Foam/Skin Polyethylene is going to make a difference? And is that 6.1% worth $400 dollars more? LOL You got to be kidding me. I can't believe people are so desperate to defend a scam.

In a analog cable, maybe.

A digital HDMI cable ... buy any good cable that works. It's digital.

I would happily use these:

http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=181-772

$6 each