Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: HDMI Cable price difference

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » The Afterlife » HDMI Cable price difference (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: HDMI Cable price difference

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 02-13-2009 08:14 PM

Why is there a difference in HDMI cable prices. I was told to expect to pay to pay about a hundred dollars for a eight feet cable and I saw an online advertisement that such a cable can be bought for about $25.00 or even less. I remember I was once talked into using Monster cable for my sound system installation and found out later I could have bought cable costing much less and got the same sound quality from my system. Is this the same with HDMI cables?

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Bruce Hansen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 847
From: Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 02-13-2009 08:31 PM

The difference in price is due to one thing: greed. Most people are lost when it comes to such things, and can be talked into paying $100 for a $5 cable. HDMI is digital, if it gets there, it's fine. Even if the signal gets attenuated somewhat, there is NO difference in what you will see (and hear). A "1" is still a "1", a "0" is still a "0".

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 02-13-2009 09:17 PM

MonoPrice.com

Actually it looks like they've raised their prices recently. Anyway I'm running with monoprice HDMI cables and they work flawlessly for me, including Blu-ray from a PS3.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-13-2009 10:06 PM

The main thing to watch is the version of HDMI the cable supports. Just make sure you buy cables that support the HDMI 1.3a standard (which is currently the latest version of the spec.).

If you mistakenly buy a cable that only supports HDMI 1.1 or 1.2 features you may be limited from using newer Blu-ray oriented features like deep color, 1080p/24 frame rates and next-gen audio format support (Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD, high bit rate LPCM).

Monster Cables are a high priced rip-off. On top of that, their product packaging for HDMI cables mentions nothing about the version of HDMI supported. They just throw up some stupid "5000" and "10000" non-standard nonsense.

Monoprice is a great resource. But if you need something immediately, Wal-Mart has a couple decent HDMI cable choices that run in the $25 to $35 range for 3' to 6' lengths. Phillips makes some decent cables with gold plated connections that fall in that price range. Lately I've seen Wal-Mart carrying HDMI 1.3a cables from Visio that cost a few bucks less.

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 02-13-2009 10:22 PM

Claude:

Watch this video and you get the point.

http://www.cbc.ca/mrl3/8752/marketplace/packing_the_deal.wmv
[it's a report by a major broadcaster in canada about the HDMI cable scams. If you have trouble opening it, let me know and I'll upload it to youtube. It basically states that, as it should be, any reasonably made cheap cable would obtain the 100% exact same end result as an expensive one]

quote: Bobby Henderson
If you mistakenly buy a cable that only supports HDMI 1.1 or 1.2 features you may be limited from using newer Blu-ray oriented features like deep color, 1080p/24 frame rates and next-gen audio format support (Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD, high bit rate LPCM).

Bobby is not entirely right as officially there is no such thing as "1.1" or "1.2" or "1.3" cable. An HDMI (certified) cable is a cable and period. But HDMI indeed establishes two cathegories, cat 1 and cat 2. This is from HDMI consortium own's website:

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#48

quote:
Recently, HDMI Licensing, LLC announced that cables would be tested as Standard or High-Speed cables.

Standard (or “category 1”) cables have been tested to perform at speeds of 75Mhz, which is the equivalent of a 1080i signal.
High Speed (or “category 2”) cables have been tested to perform at speeds of 340Mhz, which is the highest bandwidth currently available over an HDMI cable and can successfully handle 1080p signals including those at increased color depths and/or increased refresh rates. High-Speed cables are also able to accommodate higher resolution displays, such as WQXGA cinema monitors (resolution of 2560 x 1600).

But in practice, Bobby is right as a lot of (bad) manufacturers decide to label their cables 1.2, or 1.3 or whatever. If you can determine a particular cable to be cat 2 (should be officially labelled "high speed" as oppossed to "standard", may mention HDMI 1.3 in the package), fine, buy it. If not, don't worry much about it. No reason for them to cost more than $10 for a normal length good one and you can always get a new one later on if you ever need it for extra bandwidth applications in the future.

[ 02-14-2009, 08:02 AM: Message edited by: Julio Roberto ]

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 02-13-2009 10:51 PM

HDMI ain't got nuthin' on Ethernet, except maybe for the "simplicity" in protocol.

| IP: Logged

Mark Ogden
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 943
From: Little Falls, N.J.
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-14-2009 05:19 AM

Let me highly recommend the HDMI cables from a company called Blue Jeans Cable out of Seattle. Their BJC Series F2 cables are American made/Chinese terminated Belden, and they are the best I've ever owned and very reasonable priced. Be careful of their larger gauge Series 1, however, it's quite stiff and heavy and should probably be strain-relived before it goes into your set's jack.

Also, for a good chuckle be sure to visit their Monster Cable Litigation Page, which is the story of how they dealt with an attempt by Monster to sue them for trademark infringement. Check out the owner's response of 4/14/08, it's an up-yours classic.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 02-14-2009 07:09 AM

Actually the Monoprice cables are very good cables. I use their "in wall" cables at home as well as their flat screen wall mounts.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Julio Roberto
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 938
From: Madrid, Madrid, Spain
Registered: Oct 2008

posted 02-14-2009 08:50 AM

The small manufacturer pointed by Mark Ogden above (blujeanscable) seems to be fairly decent guys and, while of course trying to defend their products advantages over others, seem to make fair and balanced (well, only slightly skewed to their advantage) points in their website.

You may want to read their FAQ page, specially sections like:

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/hdmi-spec-versions.htm?hdmiinfo

quote:
Many people are worried, when buying HDMI cable, about the spec version of the cable in question. Is it the latest spec version? Will it support all the features of the devices it's hooked to? Most of the fears and doubts associated with this question are unfounded, but there are some interesting issues with regard to HDMI spec version, and we'll sort those out here.

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/hdmi-cable-information.htm?hdmidept

quote:
We're often asked whether, if one is just running a short (say, 6 foot) length of HDMI cable from one device to another, without switches, couplers, relays and whatnot, there will be any quality upgrade in sound or picture from buying a higher-quality HDMI cable, or whether one should just go with something reasonably-made and economical. The answer is that, at short lengths, in the vast majority of circumstances, all non-defective HDMI cables will perform equally well (and no, it doesn't matter what spec version it is); the signal is digital and the devices don't know whether they're hooked up with a four-dollar cable or something better or pricier.

The short-short-short "answer" is: for a short length, any reasonable, non-defective cable is good, and they can be as little as $3 and still be "perfect" and good quality.

Most cables are cat2 capable whether tested, certified, or whatnot, at those lengths. You may find some really crappy generics that are not, but that would be a matter of bad luck, as good cat2 generics abound. If you buy a non-generic or, even better, a truly brand-name certified one, then you are guaranteed "perfect" performance, no matter if the price is high or low.

Only time when cable "quality" (or rather, mostly cable gauge and shielding) come into play, like in any other digital high bandwidth application, is in long runs. Say stuff over 15 feet. Then you may want to start worrying (a bit) and look into it a bit closer. Still, no need for cables up to about 30' to be expensive at all, and certainly not above $100 for just about any reason whatsoever.

Except marketing reasons, of course. Then you can be silly enough to spend $1000 in a piece of cable and tell all your neighbours about it (altough I would be ashamed-silent rather than boasting about how stupid I was).

This place carries cheap cables convinienly:

http://www.meritline.com/dvi-digital-cabel.html

There are many places like that. I've bought japanese media and generic asian cables from them. No complains with either (on the contrary).

[ 02-14-2009, 12:29 PM: Message edited by: Julio Roberto ]

| IP: Logged

Sam Graham
AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues.

Posts: 1431
From: Waukee, IA
Registered: Dec 2004

posted 02-14-2009 01:01 PM

I am using both Monoprice and BlueJeans cables with no problems, or even noticeable differences in operation.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 02-14-2009 02:42 PM

Thank you for all of the useful information, guys [Smile]

I have been looking at some very nice HD sets at Costco and was just amazed how reasonable the prices are now. I saw a nice 40" 1080p Toshiba priced at around $895.00. There were also Samsung, Panasonic and other brands that were cheaper because of smaller screens with a 720p display. I think there was also a Vizio 40" 1080p for about $795.00. How is the quality and reliability of Vizio? My brother has a beautiful Sony with a huge 1080p screen over 50" wide but I do not need anything like that. I will be happy with a 32" or 40" screen and was wondering how important it is to get one that has a 1080p picture. I am partial to a 1080p because it is considered the yield the best picture but was told it was not too important with screens measuring #32' inches or smaller because most people's eyes will not be able to see the difference. Is that true?

Please keep the information coming.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-14-2009 03:12 PM

Viewing distance plays a big part on whether it's worth it to pay more for 1080p resolution in a smaller TV.

If you're watching a TV with a diagonal size of less than 36"-40" at distances of more than 6'-8' then 1280 X 720 would certainly seem sufficient to get the job done.

I'm viewing my 52" Sony Bravia XBR4 TV at a distance of about 7' and I can see the differences in 720p resolution material versus 1080-based programming.

I'll also say there is more going on with a good quality HDTV set than mere resolution capability alone. You have to consider the television's refresh rate (60Hz, 120Hz, etc.). The quality of the TV's color engine and ability to be adjusted is pretty important. How many HDMI ports does the TV have and what features does it support via HDMI? Deep color? 1080p/24 video support? Does the TV have PC connectivity, LAN support, etc.?

No TV is going to be 100% perfect. You just have to weigh what features you find important. If you don't need certain other bells and whistles you'll be able to save quite a bit of money.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 02-14-2009 03:34 PM

Bobby,

The sets on display at outlets such as Best Buy, the soon to close Circuit City, and Costco has their sets adjusted and displayed with very impressive picture quality. On the other hand, the HD sets at Wal*Mart and even Sam's Club regardless of the price are displayed with a picture that look like shit or sub standard. If I am interested in getting the best picture & sound quality possible and plan to view HD movies from my BD player as well as HD television from a HD cable receiver & DVR box, will I need more than two HDMI inputs on the television set? The $895.00 Toshiba and even the Vizio 1080p sets are very reasonably priced at Costco but do they lack functions that I might need that come with more expensive sets? As far as the picture quality displayed on these two sets, they are almost identical to the more expensive sets displayed at Costco.

-Claude

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 02-14-2009 04:21 PM

Multiple HDMI inputs are important if you're using an older AV receiver lacking HDMI connection. My TV has 3 HDMI inputs. I have my PS3 and Dish Network ViP722 receiver connected direct to the TV via HDMI. I'm running optical cables alone to my old Yamaha receiver. For over the air antenna stuff, I'm feeding an optical cable into the CD input on my receiver -and I get the Dolby Digital 5.1 broadcast support running it that way.

Anyone with a new receiver with HDMI inputs and HDMI monitor output won't need a HDTV with lots of inputs on the back.

120Hz refresh and motion enhancement functions mark a big line of separation from more expensive LCD televisions versus more affordable televisions found in stores like Wal-Mart. Sony's newest Bravia XBR7 model supports a 240Hz refresh rate. I think it's the XBR6 which features LED back-lighting.

In general the LCD and plasma televisions costing less than $1000 represent HDTV technology at least 2 or more generations behind the TVs commanding $2000 and higher prices.

Oh, by the way I think Wal-Mart's HD video feed to their monitors is pretty heavily data compressed. That's one source of the crappy picture problem. The overhead fluorescent lighting common to those stores is another problem. Factor in the possibility of customers monkeying around with TV settings -or that they're never adjusted at all.

Stores like Best Buy go the other way, setting pictures to cartoonish "vivid" settings, turning on all the motion enhancement stuff and on and on.

Ultimately you need to be able to play around with some of the settings on the TV before you buy it. That's what we did when a friend of mine bought his Samsung Series 7 52" LCD HDTV. We had the folks at Circuit City hook up a Blu-ray player to it and we checked out a lot of the settings. Once we were satisfied that it was a great TV set then the sale was made. Going to that trouble shouldn't be a problem especially if the customer is spending upwards of $3000.

| IP: Logged

Claude S. Ayakawa
Film God

Posts: 2738
From: Waipahu, Hawaii, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 02-14-2009 05:10 PM

Bobby,

Why is it important to have more HDMI inputs as possible on a HD TV when I will run the audio from my BD player to my old Denon receive with an optical cable like I am doing now and HDMI 'out' from the BD player to HDMI 'in' on the TV. The 2nd HDMI cable will be from the Cable HD DVR box HDMI 'out' to the HDMI 'in' on the TV. Although it would be nice to have as much HDMI inputs on the TV, why will I need more than two inputs if I do not plan to add a video game unit or any other devices that require an HDMI cable? Since my receiver does not have an HDMI input because of it's age and my BD player does not have an analogue output that will allow me to connect to the existing 7.1 input on the receiver, why will I need another HDMI cable?

-Claude

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.