Hi Thad,
It seems to me that there are two contradictions in your post on the subject. You seem to be saying the protocol (which I take to mean the HDMI technical standard?) ensures data is transmitted perfectly, yet you end with the possibility of there being bad cables. That's a clear contradiction since if the protocol ensured pure data transmission there would be no bad/broken cables of any kind!
Venkat seems to be saying inspite of a standard protocol, there exists the possibility of bad cables. Which is what the last line in your post says.
I tend to agree with Venkat and I'd personally watch out for cable differences, especially over longer lengths. I wouldn't spend too much though on a shorter length HDMI cables. That's my take out from what everyone has been discussing and the research I've done.
Regards
Edit: I think Venkat first para is technical Thad so you're not being really fair in asserting that his post was devoid of technical reasons. I mean variation in current changing is a technical reason right?
I will not quote Venkat's tread as its essentially a repeat of what he has been talking about. Hope he do not get offended if I refer him hear to expand the discussion based on his response.
Stevie - wish you could have been more forthcoming in reading all the posts on this thread and you would know Venkat has gone back to square one talking of ANALOG PRINCIPLES in DIGITAL ELECTRONICS yet again! That is EXACTLY I had written after reading his numerous posts and arguments
Despite extreme distortion on the current and voltage characteristics and waveforms, FACT is the receiving end will STILL decode the ORIGINAL digital stream at 100% accuracy unless there is a strong EMI (which is essentially impossible like digitalv has explained!). ALL HDMI cables, essentially follow similar technology and principles and the more expensive ones may be using more expensive and refined material and manufacturing process.
Once again, Venkat answered himself on his post, when he saw green, he replaced the cables to FIX the issue. Hence, again while he talk of variation of audio and video quality (not possible in Digital communication), only thing which can happen with a bad cable (which essentially none of us have observed till date unless the cable was BAD and needed to be DISCARDED, irrespective of its price!).
Seems he has overlooked the HDMI spec and as I had written that HDMI cable contains 2 copy of digital video and hence its virtually impossible for an error to get unnoticed and uncorrected despite all the distortion happening to the "current and voltage". Its very SAFE to recommend an expensive equipment, however while recommending, we should own the responsibility to recommend it DILIGENTLY without compromising the efficiency and feasibility of the recommended "solution".
Here, if a Rs.100 HDMI cable performs IDENTICAL to a Rs.10k cable, how much LEGITIMATE it is to STILL ADVOCATE and BOOST of the Rs.10k cable about how much "better" that cable "can" be and what CAN change using that cable? Do we have any PROOF of such tall claim which obviously ANYONE can make for an expensive product even when there is NO UNDERLYING reason for the same?
The lengths were exactly 5 meters. And the receivers were brand new and had absolutely no issues.
When you say, 'two bad cables or the ones which were manufactured without applying any engineering sense', you are echoing what I have been talking about all this while. And that is where my comfort feeling comes in. When I buy from a unknown brand, I have no comfort in their manufacturing process, and I have no idea what engineering or even testing process they have deployed. When I buy a cable, I certainly don't want to be given a 'bad' cable.
When I buy from a brand I am comfortable with, I have the knowledge that some quality process and some testing process would have been deployed. That the correct material would be used for shielding. That the accepted copper would be used for the cores.
And, mind you, I am not even talking about prices here. You can get a 1 meter HDMI cable from some company such as Wireworld, Audioquest, etc for around 1000-1500.
When you try to sell a cable for some (say) 200, you obviously have to cut corners somewhere. I am sure you would say the raw material cost is very very low. But, there are other costs to an organisation, and I vaguely remember we have discussed this in another thread.
Cheers
Venkat - I have referred your earlier post in my response to Stevie, will it help anyone to try analyzing how an identical cable (or any product for that matter) can have a cost difference of more than 10 folds?
What will WE GET TRYING to analyze the REASONS behind the cost difference? It can WELL happen that an expensive cable from your "known" brand may perform WORSE than an inexpensive one (I don't know "Wireworld" honestly and for me its another "unknown" manufacturer like any other "cheap" ones).
Please help me understand - Why do I come across most of your posts SPECULATING things based on ANALYSIS on UNKNOWN/VARIABLE facts? I request you to please go through them once again and let me know if I have misunderstood you.
While we discuss on this thread, I came across endless reviews and analysis CONFIRMING my FIRM TECHNICAL UNDERSTANDING that HDMI CABLE QUALITY CAN NOT CHANGE THE QUALITY OF AV despite variations and distortion of current and voltage within them at the reception. Why are you so FIRM in your understanding despite DOCUMENTED PROOFS, STUDIES, RECOMMENDATIONS from virtually all the legitimate authorities?
Last but not the least, please help me understand why would someone recommend spending even a Rs.1k cable if it performs IDENTICAL to a Rs.100 cable giving him 100% on his most expensive products costing more than 10Lac?
