you would think not, but it really depends on your system as a whole (source, DAC, amplification, speakers, cables, room). If it is highly resolving you can perhaps hear a difference. I doubt it makes a difference in mid range HT systems. And it won't be something you can hear very obviously either. So for HT intents and purposes, as long as the cable is not broken and properly manufactured (shielding, impedance etc within spec) cables don't differ.

However... http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.mpl?forum=...ht=modwright&r=

or here.. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/115776.html

or here http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/115763.html

the upshot is it may not be digitally measurable, but certainly audible.

My take is

1) the system as a whole should be balanced, there is no point using Nordost Valhalla i/cs (US$3300/m pair) to connect a Marantz CD63 to a Cambridge Audio amplifier... and

2) cables are the last thing you tweak after bringing your equipment to the same "level" - including treating the room (this has more effect on the sound than anything else other than speakers)

moomoos,

Was there less noise in the images?

What type of interconnect are you referring to above? HDMI cable, optical cable or the analogue RCA cable?

---

Added on November 5, 2009, 10:02 am

This calls for a blind test! 

yeah curious to know also..    what are the BD player and TV also..

where's the monster cable ?

both coaxial and optica cable are known accepted types of audio digital interconnects.... 

get it from reputable dealer lor... so detailed eye to notice the minute difference in HDMI quality between cable but cannot notice imitation products meh?

Ok let me see if i can convince you.

Do you know how binary (0, 1) system works?

A LCD tv is made of millions of pixels (or dots). 1920x1080(2 million pixels) for a FullHD tv
Each pixel is encoded by binaries. If you see your GC properties, there is an option to choose 32-bit color or 16-bit color, this is what represents a pixel.
32 bit means 32 (0 or 1) to represent the color that a pixel can display.

So take an example that you are displaying a fat straight line with some blur around the edges (which means grey pixels around it)
These grey pixels can never becomes black pixels which will make the line looked clearer. WHY?? Because the cable can never know what encoding to make it display a black pixel. It doesn't have a chip/DSP for such algorithm.

Similarly, if the picture is a well defined straight line with no grey pixels around it, a capalang cable can never make the pixels grey in color. At most (if the build quality is lousy), the encoding for that particular pixel got lost during the transmission and the TV will just display a weird color for pixel (white i think).

Similarly is for audio. Do you know how analog signal is encoded into digital form?

Ok...then no need to buy Monster HDMI cable lah...Coz my friend suggested me to buy. If there's no difference, there's no need to buy. Thanks anfieldude!

your company is developing a rival connection to a universally supported connection standard? what port it will be connected to?

Theoraticaly it doesnt sound right that better cables are better but practicaly there
s a significant difference to certain cables:D

cheap cables also got rated for Hi-speed.. so I don't see any other issue regarding using cheaper value cables..

hehe! so to get best audio CD sound from BD player is to use analog ar?

as for the differences between specs: read this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HDMI
[attachmentid=1327431]