i am not here to spoil your sale.. but your example of driving a cheap car to the destination is a bad example.. some ppl like fast cars bcoz of the power.. some ppl like super expensive comfortable cars... they can reach their destination in a diff way compared to a kancil... but in the case of hdmi its like u can buy a cheap car as fast as a ferrari and as luxurious as a maybach for a price of a rm30k kancil then y not? i dont think there is anything wrong with buying an expensive hdmi cable and feeling good abt it.. but i do think it is wrong to tell others that branded hdmi provides better picture..

so personally i feel monster cable is a luxury item that MIGHT last longer, looks better (for sure) but works the same as my blu jean.. oh i 4got to mention it costs a few times more than my blu jeans

This post has been edited by mys_terious: Mar 12 2009, 03:17 PM

I think we should be careful when choosing a cheap and no brand HDMI cable.
I got one cheap HDMI cable 1.5M long.
It looks good when I first plug into my dvd player.
After I switch resolution to 1080P and the picture start pixeling.
Buy another branded cable works fine
That cable only works on 1080i, 720p or 720i or lower resolution.
I think that cable just simply not meet the V1.3a standard.
The shop jusy cheap selling old cable.

This post has been edited by hih: Apr 8 2009, 07:50 PM

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, 10:55 AM

haha..
personally.. i experienced the difference upgrading from normal s-video to monster s-video.. smoother movement, less noisy picture, and sharper edge (might not be a good thing.. sharp edges looked digital.. ) but the pro's outweights the cons, and im satisfied for the price i paid (was second hand tho.. )

i will be getting monster hdmi later.. but that's not my priority right now.. next yr perhaps?

HDMI: Need for Speed

Believe it or not, HDMI cables are not all created equal. Some can handle video from DVD players just fine, but if you connect a Playstation 3 to them and try to play a game, you might be in for a shock – the video might not display at the maximum resolution of your television, for example, or might not work at all. So read on, and learn all about how our cables to meet – and exceed – industry specifications so that you can enjoy your home theater to its potential.

This diagram illustrates the progression of complexity that occurs when you’re going from a simple DVD signal to that of devices such as the Playstation 3 – and beyond. Rich video (such as that created by 120HZ displays running at a resolution of 1080p) and complex audio (such as Dolby DTS 5.1 surround sound) require much more bandwidth than a basic DVD signal with stereo sound and require a much more sophisticated cable. If the cable you’re using isn’t up to the task of pushing enough data, your player may downgrade your signal to a lower resolution, or visual artifacts such as colored spots may appear on your video.




http://www.monstercable.com/hdmi/hdmi_spee...cable_speed.asp

Well constructed chart with each elements shown clearly.
Well users to decide then..

This post has been edited by sKyWiR3pT3lTd: Apr 16 2010, 10:12 PM

Explaining 3D Formats
Due to the high speed of the 1920 x 1080 signal at 120Hz, extra care must be taken in cable bandwidth, connections, crimps and bending to introduce bit errors.

By George Walter
March 18, 2010
http://www.cepro.com/article/explaining_3d_formats/D1/


Extraordinary 3D is all about creating the best environment and equipping it with powerful 3D displays capable of delivering a truly immersive experience.

In the world of 3D entertainment, the believability of the experience is everything.
Let's take a look at the more advanced levels of 3D display technology available for home use.


Low Tech: 3D via Anaglyph 3D

Due to the limited number of true 3D TVs currently in homes, the delivery of television-based 3D content has had to rely on the anaglyph 3D process.

Viewed in 2D mode, the images look like "double vision" with one image having a cyan tint and the other image having a red tint. Anaglyph content is viewed using matching glasses, which have a cyan filter as the lens for the left eye, and a red filter as the lens for the right eye.

Through the anaglyph viewing process, the cyan content is only seen by the viewer's left eye and the red content is only seen by the viewer's right eye. This is the simplest and least expensive 3D delivery method and provides the least dynamic 3D experience.

The cyan and red filters tend to distort the color accuracy of the 3D content. Thus, while anaglyph 3D technology does allow 3D content to be delivered to any television in any home, it is generally considered to provide a 3D experience that is far from state of the art.


Mid Tech: 3D DLP for TVs

The first 3D DLP consumer displays were introduced in 2007 as rear-screen single-chip TVs. Using the inherent speed of the DLP's micro mirrors technology, the displays transmit left and right eye imagery separately for stereoscopic imaging with high-quality 3D glasses.

Consumer-level 3D DLP TVs enlist a specific technology referred to as checkerboard imaging. For example, the red squares of the checkerboard represent the right eye, and the black square represents the left eye. In this fashion, full 1080p images can be displayed without the need for expanded bandwidth.

The images are displayed 60Hz right eye and 60Hz left eye (equivalent to 120Hz). Since every other pixel is dedicated to either the left or the right eye, the resolution of each single eye image is only half the native resolution of the 3D television. While this does sacrifice image quality, no additional system bandwidth is required to support signal distribution.

The high-speed LCD shutter glasses allow the appropriate left eye information to transmit to the left eye and right eye information to transmit to the right eye. Thus, total left and right eye signal can equal full 1920 x 1080, if that is the native resolution of the 3D TV.


High Tech: Active 3D Projectors

The latest 3-chip 3D projectors use a more advanced technology capable of supporting full Active 3D whereby a 120Hz signal is fed to the projector (full 1920 x 1080 60Hz, left; full 1920 x 1080 60Hz, right), and the right eye and left eye are displayed sequentially. Once again, high-speed LCD shutter glasses are used and synchronized with the projector via an IR emitter, blocking the right eye when left eye content is displayed, and vice versa.

The signal requirement is that you either need a high-speed dual link DVI cable to transmit 120Hz full HD signals to the projector from the source or two standard DVI/HDMI cables - one for the right eye content, one for the left eye content.

HDMI 1.4 looks to reduce this to a single cable. Due to the high speed of the 1920 x 1080 signal at 120Hz, extra care must be taken in cable bandwidth, connections, crimps and bending so as not to introduce bit errors.

There are several DLP two-piece consumer projection systems and flat-panel displays that advertise 3D capability, but they do so only at reduced resolutions. By reducing the resolution, the electronics and response times are greatly simplified. Most gaming flat panels are maximum 1680 x 1050, and many of the single-chip 3D projectors present a maximum of 1024 x 768 resolution.

There are a number of ways to create 3D with DLP systems. There are also numerous ways of generating 3D material, so the possible outcomes are limitless!

Woohoo...

Cant believe anyone still interesting in debating the difference with branded and cheapo cables even if its for HDMI. If your pocket allows, go with whatever you BELIEVED in. Dont bother.

Its more of comparing differences rather than debating. Thick wallets / thin wallets doesn't matter.

Like you said , if pocket allows the minimal, go for the one minimal price..otherwise get the costly ones for a sake of brand.

I'm not against any brand here, even i admit that i've bought Monster and i regret. Now im using a 1.3b RM15 cable , a happy man i am.

i dunno the details of HDMI cable that u guys discussing.
for me it just same whether i use cheapo or monster HDMI cable.
no difference at all... and i feel cheated after bought the expensive cables...

really r bro?thinking of getting a monster cable

Meant please buy cheap cable if you run at shorter than 3m.