Again you are confusing the issues. Understandably as a Monster reseller you want to push your Monster cables, but please get your facts straight and know the difference between the theoretical and practical.

So what if your Monster Ultra 800 HDMI cable is called "Advanced High Speed" and can achieve greater than 6.68 Gbps and exceeds 1080p resolution requirements? Please explain the practical benefits of this.

This post has been edited by jchong: Dec 4 2009, 09:28 AM

The fuss is simply about whether expensive or high-end HDMI cables offer any improvements/benefits over cheaper HDMI cables?

As far as I know, gold plating is for the purpose of corrosion resistance (and making it look expensive). Nothing to do with improved conductivity.

Also the gold plating is normally on the jacks and plugs. I haven't heard of the wire strands being gold plated.

As pointed out already, the main relevant spec is whether the HDMI cable is standard speed or high speed.

If the RM10 Tesco cable is standard speed and the premium branded cables are high speed then maybe you have a point. If there is a cheapo high speed HDMI cable, would you still say it "will not work as good as Monster, Audioquest, QED, or other premium cables."?

To me the thing about cheapo cables is whether you can trust the label. If it is labelled as "high speed" has it been certified or tested to be so? If it has been certified and tested to be high speed then there is no problem.

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 14 2010, 02:20 PM

Since you are a seller of premium cables I always take what you post with a grain of salt. It is obvious from your posting that sometimes you oversimplify or confuse things to push your agenda of selling premium HDMI cables.

Firstly, we are not telling people to invest only in RM10 HDMI cables. Get a decent HDMI cable that is Cat 2 certified and you're good to go. If you look at monoprice.com they have a 6FT 28AWG High Speed HDMI Cable which is Cat 2 certified for only US$3.04. Hey, wait a minute that's actually cheaper than RM10 Ok give chance, monoprice has another 6FT 24AWG CL2 High Speed HDMI Cable for US$6.75. Still considered "cheapo" I guess. So these "cheapo" monoprice cables meets the high speed spec. Is it still necessary to buy a Monster "high speed" HDMI cable? The bottomline is that "cheap" doesn't mean it is not high speed.

As for your argument about quality and build of the cable and interference, it can sometimes happen (in rare cases I might add). So again buy from a reputable vendor, make sure it is Cat 2 certified (and at least v1.3, now v1.4) and you can still find a lot of cables like that for a fraction of the price of premium branded cables.

If you are so confident of the superior quality of premium branded cables how about you do a blind test to compare a Monster cable vs a cheapo cable (that is Cat 2). If you can pass the test then your words might carry more weight.

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 14 2010, 09:21 PM

This is where you are incorrect. Some of these articles are not just based on opinion but are based on actual tests.

Let me ask you, do you know what are the specs or standards from these "THX, DTS, Dolby, SimplayHD, ISF, ROHS compliant, etc." insofar as it relates to HDMI performance? You are simply parroting what is on the label/packaging without really understanding if they have any real impact or not on HDMI performance. Like ROHS, do you know what it is all about? Let me enlighten you:



It's a content safety standard, nothing at all to do with HDMI performance.

The main relevant certification is the HDMI Compliance Test Specification. Do you know if some/all of the Monster HDMI cables have official Category 2 certification? I looked the Monster's website but could not find any thing about official Category 2 certification.

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 15 2010, 12:26 AM

Again, you are twisting the facts and confusing people.

U keep using inconsistent terminology hoping to argue that the normal cable most people are using is not good enough for 1080p. So let me ask you:

1. Do you know for certain that the 'normal' or 'cheapo' or 'regular' cables that most people use are standard speed only? Maybe these cables can fall into the high speed category?
2. Most people have already reported that their 'normal' or 'cheapo' or 'regular' cable can support 1080p. What does this imply?

I also asked you earlier if Monster HDMI cables are Cat 2 (High Speed) certified. U haven't answered me yet.

I can trust those certifications which are trustworthy. I was simply asking you for the info.

In this case Simplay Labs is a HDMI ATC so I would say they are trustworthy. In looking at the link you gave I also notice many other verified cables, some of which seem to be brandless like the 1st one: "11 Meter (24AWG) HDMI Cable". So perhaps even sticking to brandless cables like you suggested is ok right?

Even Best Buy has some verified cables. Wow.

I have no idea if the cheap cables are certified or not. My point is that you are automatically implying that they are standard speed. I am saying that they might be capable of supporting high speed.

The issue is whether the cable can support a 1080p signal. If you play DVD using HDMI and that picture is upscaled to 1080p the picture might not be as good quality as true 1080p content but the signal is a 1080p signal right?

Thanks for answering my question. What it convinces me is that Monster has sent their cables for testing and it meets certain test specifications. Good for them.

But it doesn't convince me that Monster cables (or other premium branded cables) provide superior video quality compared to other cheaper certified cables. Yeah, the ones from monoprice or Tesco we do not know if they are certified or not. So let's compare to a known certified cable like the BJC Series F2. The ATC cert can be viewed here: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/hdmi-c...s/f2cat2atc.pdf A 6' length of this HDMI cable is US$17.00 - not super cheap but still much cheaper than many premium branded cables.

So you are saying that Monster cables would provide superior video quality compared to the BJC Series F2?

---

Added on August 15, 2010, 12:01 pmYes, indeed THX has a special page for Monster. I would imagine that the THX standards should be fairly stringent too.

Anyway, seems the THX certification only applies to the High Speed 700; Ultra High Speed 900; and Ultimate High Speed 1000. So some of those cables you sell like the Ultra 600, 800 and 1000 - do these have THX cert?

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 15 2010, 12:09 PM

Well, just want to ensure both sides of the story are told. Then each person can decide what they want to buy.

Yeah, I'm all for doing a blind test. We can bring our HDMI cables and DigitalTech can bring some of his Monster cables. We can all be the test subjects, I'm curious to know too.

Part of the judder you're seeing is the usual 24p judder. 24 FPS won't be super smooth on panning scenes and this is normal. Even the best cables won't solve this.

As for whether cheap cables will introduce any more judder (than is normal on 24p) I don't know.

Unfortunately the current prices at bettercables.com are no longer that affordable.

Those are just your excuses. Secretly you're afraid of the outcome. Because if you're there and you can't also tell the difference then your whole case and credibility goes down the drain.

See, this shows you don't fully understand what you're selling. SimplayHD, THX, HDMI.org talk about technical standards. Most of which relate to bandwidth and length. They talk about quantitative measures, not qualitative ones.

So tell me, what is the relationship of bandwidth to image quality? Assuming two different cables with the same bandwidth capacity, how will that impact image quality?



Definitely! If the outcome is that premium cables got positive difference I would be quite keen to buy it. I'm serious.

This is where you're wrong. We're here to learn also. Don't you want to prove that expensive cable is better than cheap cable? If we are proven wrong then we also learn something new.

For example, in the past I didn't believe in branded power cords. I thought the standard one is good enough and there was no difference with the expensive cords. Then I borrowed some branded power cords and did some listening tests. Ok there was some difference so I bought the branded power cords.

---

Added on August 19, 2010, 9:01 pmYou're right, bandwidth is related to hardware and the media format involved. How it relates to cables is that the cable must be able to carry the bandwidth between the hardware.

Like if you have gigabit hardware on both ends, you need a gigabit LAN cable for the hardware work to full capacity. If you use a cable only suitable for 100BASE-T then there will be limitations.

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 19 2010, 10:23 PM

Yes, I agree that cable construction can affect data transfer speed.

I'm sure that between standard HDMI cable and high speed HDMI cable there are construction differences.

Again you are confusing the issues and trying to relate it to banking licenses which are not relevant.

Like I mentioned before those certifications are related to quantitative measures, not qualitative. Do you understand the difference?

With the certification, you can say this cable is certified to support up to 10.2Gbps. In terms of speed (which is a quantitative measure) you can say that certified cable has better performance than a cable which only supports up to 4.5Gbps. Or if a cable is certified to work up to 15' vs another one which is 6' only (you can say the former has better performance in terms of distance).

But the real question is can you say that the certified cable is certified to give you more vivid colours, or deeper blacks (these are qualitative measures)?

Look closely at the test criteria for THX or SimplayLabs, they can certify for speed or signal degradation over length, etc. Where do they ever say "cables that meet THX standards will give you the deepest blacks" or "tested to ensure the most vivid colours" or "certified to give you the clearest picture possible". None of them ever say that.

I asked you earlier: "Assuming two different cables with the same bandwidth capacity, how will that impact image quality?" Can you answer this?

Ok, so now we get to the heart of your argument. So in summary you are saying that no certification = no good because they cannot confirm the bandwidth or speed. That's it?! That's your whole argument for pushing people to buy expensive cables?

Do bear in mind the counterpoint is that just because the speed is not confirmed via certification doesn't mean it cannot be achieved. Did you see the link given above: http://www.audioholics.com/education/cable...testing-results Look at the testing results: at 6' length even the monoprice HDMI passes the 10.2GBps rate. Same as the few Monster cables listed. Of course those results cannot speak for other cheapo HDMI cables sold locally by Tesco or other hypermarkets.

Also just to clarify with you, are you also saying that certified cables will give better video quality compared to non-certified cables? Please answer.

And you still haven't answered my question: "Assuming two different cables with the same bandwidth capacity, how will that impact image quality?"

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 20 2010, 09:31 AM

I would agree to this statement.

What about you DigitalTech? Agree or not?

This post has been edited by jchong: Aug 20 2010, 09:51 AM

Glad we all agree on this.



Using the car analogy is a little flawed.

What is the basic function of a car? Get from point A to B. Cheap or expensive car can also do the same.

But apart from the basic function, there are important secondary functions of a car:

* Safety - as you pointed out. Relevant here are crash test standards, safety equipment like air bags, ABS, EBD, etc.
* Comfort - noise insulation, suspension, etc.
* Handling, etc.

The secondary functions are real and practical. And people will pay more to get these functions because these functions make a real world difference.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's look now at HDMI cables.

Basic function: to transmit the signal from one device to another. In short lengths cheap or expensive cable will be able to transmit signal.

Next, are there secondary functions of the cable that are real and practical?

* Length rating - this is quite important and real, since many people might want to run long HDMI cables (e.g. to projector). Thankfully this is certifiable but you really need to ask about it. Here is where clearly price or brand doesn't dictate performance. Say I need a ~10m HDMI cable to my projector for Blu Ray. Basic bandwidth needed is 4.95Gbps. Look at the table here again: http://www.audioholics.com/education/cable...testing-results

A cheapish cable like the BJC Series 1 passes the test. The more expensive Cobalt Cables fail. All the Monsters pass The WireWorld Starlight 5 at a shocking US$1399.95 fails (though tested at 12m).

* Build quality - a rather vague term, but yes we don't want connectors to snap or pop off. We want cables that can flex and not break internally. Trouble is, since you're so keen on certifications - is there a certification for build quality?
* Safety - I think mainly the building inspectors in USA are fussy about this - whether cables, especially those which are meant to be buried in the wall or ceiling, are safe. They have CL2, CL3 rating certs. Does this really make any real world difference?

So you say expensive cables are due to build quality. First thing, what is the certificate to prove build quality? You claim Monster cables have superior build quality - how can this be proved? Any cert to show for build quality? I'm genuinely interested in this because if I want to buy a cable with better build quality, how can I tell?

BJC definitely uses Belden cables, at least for their Series 1 and Series F2. The ATC cert for both can be downloaded from BJC's page.

Trust Monster to be able to afford that kind of equipment