Monoprice.com. The $5.00 ones work perfectly on my 1080P set.
21 responses Add your response
AVS Forum has debated and studied the issue to death. What rch is referring to, I believe, is the general consensus about HDMI cables. According to the legitimate videophiles (of which I am not one), HDMI cables are sending 0's and 1's. Therefore, you shouldn't see a distinction between the monoprice model and the super-pricey stuff.
People who have compared a wide range of HDMI cables have reached the same conclusion. As a result, the conventional wisdom seems to be...pay $5-10 for your HDMI cables, so long as they're 1.3 compliant and can pass a 1080P signal.
Rch, apologies if I'm misinterpreting/misstating your position.
My friend was using the stock HDMI cord that came with his satellite receiver. Image quality was poor. I suggested he upgrade his cable. He bought a $90 Monster Cable at Radio Shack (there was a cheaper Monster cable selling for around $30...this was middle of the line).
Picture quality *dramatically* improved. Night and day difference.
The HDMI cable that came with my Panasonic DVD player went dead in less than a year. Other than that, the picture was excellent. As for the connection from my TV player (Sony HD) to the Direct TV box, I returned my $120 Monster HDMI cable after I compared it to a much cheaper Blue Jeans cable and saw absolutely no difference. That being said, since my HDMI cable for the DVD player went on the fritz, I've been playing DVDs through the component cable hookups. No difference except I like that less wires are involved with the HDMI cable.
Thedautch accurately reports that the general consensus on AVS Forum doesn't believe in high priced HDMI cables. The general consensus on that forum also thinks audiphiles are mistaken in their beliefs re: audio cables. Some of the most respected individuals on AVS Forums like "William" have noticed differences between video cables and have noted that some of the bettter, more expensive cables have less "sparklies". It should be noted that AVS Forums offers a regular link to a site that poo-poos most esoteric cables, both video and audio. I suspect that that link might be very influential on that forum.
Of course a "better" cable will probably make a difference - I have seen it as have countless others. The argument about cost boils down to a matter of degree and what you are willing to settle for. There is obviously no "right" answer here, just what is "right" for you. There definitely is a difference between a $5.00 cable and a $150. cable from a reputable mfg. - the question is what are you willing to pay for that difference? To argue there "is no difference" is either naive or foolish and only points out that some people are incapable maybe of "perceiving" a difference, not that there is none. Everyone's ears and eyes are different and we all look and listen for different things.
There are no "experts" in this - you are the expert for your gear. That's part of the beauty of a site like Agon where you can try different cables, etc.
Just my $.02
Will the differnece be that great between 19 vs. 100?
Unlike analog signals or clock timing signals, there should not be the slightest difference between digital signals if the cables are within tolerance and the bits are getting through. The whole point of digital is to elimiate the dependence on analog signal accuracy by sending a stream of two widely different states with clearly identifiable positions that remain clear given any vagaries in transmission/power/noise etc...i.e. a clearly disernable stream of what may be accurately identified as ONE's or ZERO's.
Of course a very poorly manufactured cable may give problems - but this should be the exception and not the rule.
Are you kidding me? To argue there is no difference is naive or foolish? Isn't the opposite true? To argue there is a difference when there's no real proof or evidence is naive and foolish. The argument that some people are incapable of perceiving a difference also seems ridiculous. Listen, I have a very high-end Sony HD TV, and I saw no difference between the cheap Panasonic HDMI cable that came with the DVD player and expensive Monster cable. I think that it's naive and foolish to think that there aren't a lot of companies out there who try to take advantage of our DESIRE to see or hear differences when there is none.
My experience was just the opposite of yours, but I didn't use Monster cable, nor would I. In fact, that was the cable I replaced! I contacted the Cable Company and got their top recommended HDMI cable. YES, there was a considerable difference, and NO it was not their most expensive HDMI cord. I stand by my comments - there are differences in shielding, connectors, etc. in HDMI cables just like any others, that yield differing results. There are also a number of people that insist they see or hear no differences when people in the same room do pick up the differences. Thats the difference in perceptions I was referring to, and that is by no means ridiculous - it happens every day in stores and shops across America.
I'm not saying, nor have I said, that there are NOT a lot of companies out there who try to take advantage of our desire to see or hear differences, because they DO exist. It takes some digging sometimes to find cables that make you happy and cost obviously does not necessarily equal quality.
If people WANT to see a diffrence they will, its that simple. Also talking to anyone who insists there is a big diffrence is like talking to a drunk, you can try to reason with them but you will just give up after you decide it is a waste of time to argue. That is what is both great and a shame about audio.....to each their own.
I always find it amusing when people make comments stating the higher priced monster cable's "dramatically" improve quality. I will not deny the fact there is an improvement but i will say that the same dramatic improvement can also be had for a great deal less from lesser known brands as in the case of www.bluejeancables.com and www.monoprice.com. If you want highend check out the www.ramelectronics.net cables for $33.00. Oh wait the monster cables are better! Laugh!
My point wasn't that anyone should necessarily buy Monster Cable. I don't have a single monster cable in any of my three audio and A/V systems (and there was a time when I first got into this hobby many years ago when I did). I agree with folks who have said that there are cheaper alternatives that are as good or better.
In my friend's case, he was having a bunch of people over to watch a sporting event in high def, and he was unhappy with the video quality, and Radio Shack was right up the street. My point was simply that he upgraded from the super el-cheapo garbage HDMI cord that came with his component and it solved his problem.
So, in term's of the thread's key question -- does an upgraded HDMI cable make a difference, the answer is that it sure can, at least in the case of my friend, and he and I were both able to discern a clear difference (as was his non-audio/video/file wife). Whether te upgrade needs to be "high priced" or not would require somebody to do an HDMI cable shoot out and figure out what offers the best bang for the buck.
My Toshiba XA1(hd-dvd) came with a cable; I "had" to use for 2 weeks. The cable goes to a Ruby projector with a 92 screen. Both are 1080i compatible.(the ruby is 1080p) ---I also have the Samsung 1200 BD player---Now I suppose on a 32 /42 inch lcd tv's screen, and feeding it standard def. dvds;it might be hard to discern between cables. In my setup,with this much potential;and the need for a long run; I use Wireworld's Silver hdmi. I; and my wallet know the difference.---AND---of course your milage ---.