32bit bro. Source sending out full hd signal. Im using Dynamic contrast enhancement. Gamma set to default.

Using YCbCr444 . 60hz 32bit. Refreshed and it looks fantastic.

Thanks for the tips..

If u're not getting any audio dropouts and sparklies, then the cable is fine.

Refer to this thread:
Why you shouldn't buy cheap HDMI cable (http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/738072)


(Source) http://www.audioholics.com/education/cable...ble-bench-tests

Digital Is Digital, Right?

Unlike the mumbo-jumbo surrounding TOSlink and coax optical cables, HDMI is a little more complex. When the specification is a constantly-moving target, as HDMI has proven to be - and this has been fueled by a willing consumer electronics industry - things get a little hairy. It's important to understand just why, with HDMI, you can't just say "digital is digital, it either works or it doesn't." As we referenced in detail in our article 'HDMI - It's All in the Bitrate,' HDMI has progressed (evolved) from a simple 720p/1080i 8-bit per channel signal to the current 1080p 12-bit (or more) per channel signal it is today. Just what kind of bandwidth is being sent over the cable depends on the source electronics and the capability of the display, but the potential has vastly increased since the debut of HDMI in 2003. As these signals got higher in resolution and bit depth, the amount of bits per second traveling through the HDMI cable increased. When that happened (and most recently culminating in the release of HDMI 1.3) the tolerance requirements for HDMI cables changed as well.

By way of example, with a digital audio coax cable you are dealing with a required maximum bitrate of just over 3 Mbit/s. For a S/PDIF connection, be it TOSlink or digital coax, this is chump change. The specification for that digital connection hasn't changed since ~1997 and the demands made on the cable are far less than the cable's potential capabilities. Now let's look at HDMI. A massive bundle of 15 cables (not including drain wires) - some insulated, all fairly important. In order for HDMI to remain practical, and avoid unnecessary interference, the cable has to be made, at least partially, out of stranded wire, lest 15 solid cables render the cable more of an unbendable, unwieldy stick than a cable. Additionally, the amount of information necessary to transmit the incredibly high resolution video and 8-channels of uncompressed digital audio far exceeds that of the typical DTS or Dolby Digital compressed traffic which meanders through a S/PDIF audio-only connection.


So How Do Cables Differ?

Aside from cost, HDMI cables differ in many ways. Some real obvious differences include the gauge of cable used in construction, stranded versus solid cable pairs (which greatly affects flexibility), and flat versus round. These physical differences are significant, but not nearly as important as whether or not the cables are rated to carry a particular signal a stated distance. Many cables are certified by one or more companies who provide specifications and/or speed ratings to cables. Simplay, for example is a wholly-owned division of HDMI Licensing, LLC that charges large sums of money to test cables and consumer electronics for compatibility and interoperability. Another company coming online is DPL Labs which rates cables on a 1-5 rating. It's a bit redundant since it should be pretty obvious that the Category 1 and 2 specs should be easy enough to certify and uphold. We're more concerned with manufacturer being honest than whether or not some third party certifies them or gives them a sticker. After all, nobody expects every AV receiver to be certified by a third party for exact power ratings (the FCC notwithstanding, but they hardly do more than ensure the product doesn't emit radiation).

Specific problems arise in a couple of areas. First, the equipment required to test HDMI cables is very expensive. We're talking over $200,000 for a basic setup including source generator, scope and calibrated HDMI "probes". This is obviously cost prohibitive for smaller companies to do much more than rebrand someone else's manufactured cables that have already been certified. If they choose the right manufacturer this isn't a problem, but some don't.

You can predict cable integrity and performance fairly accurately by doing the math on the cable geometry and modeling the results. This isn't easy, however (at least not for mere mortals) and we opted to use the measurement methodology instead. For a great (though very technical) article on HDMI cable modeling, please see Eugene Mayevskiy's writeup, which comes from an engineer who worked with Tektronix to deal with these very issues.

This post has been edited by DigitalTech: Apr 12 2010, 11:23 AM

so this is saying that when we buy cables - we must ensure we buy from reputable manufacturers/retailers (these businesses are held responsible for products they sell if these products don't perform as they should) and not because of price right? Therefore, for example, if Belkin is selling its cerfified 1.3b cables for a cheap price - should I buy or should i not?

As long as a HDMI cable has been certified as high speed/1.3b/b and whatever, the cables should perform as it should, no matter how cheap it is. Those who had bad experience with "cheap" cables are mainly because of being cheated by con artists who sold them not-certified poor quality cables. But human being are not as logical as they ought to be. They then developed this logic " I was conned because I bought a cheap product, therefore, all cheap products are bad products" - after they have "kena" from buying uncertified cables.

I think we need to be careful with the word cheap. I would assume that in DigitalTech's post - it is relative to Monster's price range.

There are many reputable cable makers and they are considered cheap as compared to Monster's. For example, belkin - and when it says its cables are all certified, we can be assured that they are.

I think there will not be an end to the arguing of "monster's cables makes your video better than other cheap brands". So I am not spending time arguing this. People who have the money to spend and feel good about buying Monster's cables should continue to feel happy with the cables they have bought. But those who have other uses for that kind of money - this kind of expensive cables should not be in your priority list because most likely, when you hook up your display with a cheap belkin cable (only an example), you would have been convinced by what your TV is capable of, and nothing less.

Just bought one for myself today at Tesco, for RM10!

Using it with my WDTV now.



This post has been edited by in_george: Apr 12 2010, 11:05 PM

Cable looks better than my Monster. Will buy this tomorrow

But I went to Tesco (bukit indah, JB) - could not find them at all!!!

yes, same with me...
Last Saturday I went to Tesco Taiping, i also could not find any HDMI cable sold at there!!!
maybe their target market only on Klang Valley...

I just bought one from Tesco Extra Penang @ RM10, can't feel the different with the RM30 ones sold in this forum. Design a little bit like monster cable

Do let us know if u r using it with no problems at 12bit, YCBCr, WDTV Live. If there are no audio dropouts and u see either a 12bit or 36bit to ur display, then this cable would work fine. Or maybe I can check and let u guys know if I can get a hold of them.

The price issue is secondary,
As long as the manufacturer produce & test their cable according to the Standards, the cable should work fine, irregardless whether they want to sell it RM10 or RM1000.

that cable look nicer than monster??
i wonder how your monster look like?

I am using it, bought from Tesco Tebrau City here in JB, been using it with my WDTV Live and when I turn on the 12bit YCBCr I do experience sound dropouts and some interruptions. Now I just use the 12bit with Auto setting. Without a problem. For me RM10 its a bargain. It work better then my other HDMI cable with cost me around RM30.00. This one can't even play at 12bit at all.

Thanks. What display do u own? Also are us also using Auto on the resolution page?

As I mentioned, YCbCr 12bit, 1080p (23.976/60Hz) just about maximises the bandwidth of the cables. This is a good indicator.

If the resolution is dropped it will reduce the bandwidth needed.

Something like this



This post has been edited by sKyWiR3pT3lTd: Apr 13 2010, 05:26 PM

then how can you say the tesco better looking than this??
no make sense..

bro. beauty is in the eye of the beholder

I am using Toshiba 42ZV600E, yes I think I am using, auto on the resolution page also...

Mine's a 1st Generation WDTV, so i'll try setting the display resolution to 1080P (from Auto, which is setting it to 720p) and see how it goes.

Looks better in terms of price la tailo !