 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
64.129.196.82
In Reply to: RE: HDMI or component video cables for HD cable box to HD TV? posted by Winston Smith on April 29, 2008 at 23:07:16
Actually HDMI cables simply transfer digital information. On the disks themselves, the video and analog signals are digital and multiplexed. With a decent decoder, this shouldn't be an issue.
We'll have to agree to disagree about human caused global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along.
Follow Ups:
BrianA-
Are you saying that all HDMI cables perform the same? And do you think after-market tweaks are useless? I mean, different decoders clearly should have varying degrees of performance. But on a single decoder, are you saying no visible difference will exist between different HDMI cables? If so, why? Thanks.
(And what about this 'global warming' remark? The proper term should be 'climate intensification', not 'global warming', anyway. One super volcano eruption or meteor strike would prove that mighty fast! Ice age, anyone?)
WS
...every day, they say. Now it's not even "climate change" (as I've been instructed several times to say, by believers), but "climate intensification". OK... whatever...
Or as the great Welsh sailor/writer Tristan Jones used to say, in mock agreement, "Aye, even the bloody seas are rougher now."
Or as in a Boston Globe front page headline. "The real name of Katrina is global warming". So cocksure of themselves! Alas the predicted hurricane extravaganza never materialized, but that fact never hit the headlines.
Why is that?
clark
so you can tell us all how things are just fine up there in the arctic!
Enough silliness. I agree with you the media overstates and sensationalizes everything, and it is nauseating. However, 'Scientific American' is not what I would call an alarmist or sensationalizing publication, and as a long time subscriber I can tell you that in this very area they are concerned that good science is being swept aside for profits by greedy old men who don't care about anything than their own immediate gratification, regardless of the consequences to others or the world around them. (Unless, of course, you think you're smarter than the internationally recognized climatological experts and editorial board of THAT publication, too!)
Why don't we talk about video and try to 'help' one another, hmmm? Let's leave the 'politics of science' to another forum....
You keep coming on with that stuff, and you get a reply.
"Good science" is being practiced as well by the "skeptics". Why is it that skepticism is highly regarded as healthy, as a rule, but not in the area of "anthropogenic global warming"? Why is it that here, skepticism is tantamount to "holocaust denial"? (I refer you to Ellen Goodman, Harvard '63, in the Boston Globe.) If God and science were really on your side, what would be the need for accusations and demagoguery?
As for "greedy old men", perhaps you don't realize that shareholder participation in American corporations is nearly 50% of the population, which includes widows, women and young children.
By the way, thirty years ago I caught Scientific American telling lies about digital audio, in a blatant promotional effort; I wrote them, and the editor just blustered back. The same magazine has also served as a mouthpiece for Thomas Edison and numerous others. Your trust is misplaced.
clark
The cables should not cause any issues. The adding of ferrites has to do with interference problems, where the high speed edges of the digital signals may be causing problems. Digital data transmission is almost a go or no go situation. Either the transmission is 100% or 0%. There is error correction for errors but that occurrs on the order of once per million bits or so.
Now if the digital decoder is a real cheap one, it may not do a good job of converting the digital data back to video/sound and any noise in the digital signal will end up visible or audible even though it shouldn't be this way.
About the global warming stuff. I post mostly on "The Outside Asylum" a secret part of this website where fully grown men argue like a bunch of kids about politics and religion, with some science/evolution/Global Warming stuff thrown in.
We'll have to agree to disagree about human caused global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along.
Brian A-
Thank you! I liked your post a lot. Anytime I can learn from folks, it's great.
The reason I responded as I did (and let me PLEASE apologize for the apparent dismissiveness of my tone in the original post. Not cool. Very sorry. Hope I didn't offend) was that sometimes when you tell a guy or gal that there's no difference, they just say, "OK", and don't do an investigation on their own. In my personal experience, the cables, all other things being equal, really did present a different level of resolution, and substantially so, whatever the reason for same. (But as you'll see below, I did adopt your approach, ultimately.)
My discussions with the Better Cables engineer backed up my thinking about sending the multiplexed signal on the same conductor, so thus my distaste for the format, However, I DO marvel at it as an engineering coup in many respects, and it can sure as hell save on cable costs not to have to buy nice ICs for the audio.
But your post gave me food for thought. I'm going to look at it from your perspective for a while and see if maybe my assumptions are wrong, and that there is something somewhere else causing the differences that even my 13 year old son says, "Wow!" about. Something IS going on. I want to find out what. But I sure as hell am not going to dismiss what you say out of hand. That's crap, and I'm sorry if I came across like that. No place for that here!
But please note: I DID refer the guy to the CHEAPEST cable. Why? Because what if his system is exactly as you say, i.e., such that there would be no visible difference between any of them? Well, if I told him, "DUDE! You just GOTTA get the WireWorld 'Silver Starlite Biff-Bob Wham-Bam-Thank-You-Ma'am' cable for a gazillion dollars!!!", then I guess I just talked a guy into pissing away some serious bucks. So, in a certain way, I completely backed up your position and approach, which I believe is the best one here: go cheap, as the differences make not be noticeable. I just hope I steered the guy right with the other stuff I told him about, because in my set up, MAN, do those tweaks make a visible difference to all of us here. Worth every penny!
Honestly, we DID see a difference among the cables. [But then again, we could all be simultaneously hallucinatory! : ) ]
Again thanks for the reply. You gave me food for thought, and I appreciate it.
Best Wishes,
WS
PS-
I thought the warming reference was directed to me personally, and thus my confusion. Thanks for the clarification. As for the site where grown men argue, well, I've had enough of arguing (a career spanning three decades as a civil litigator and trial attorney will do that to you.) I think I'll just listen to others, rather than argue with them. And thus, this post.
All the best!
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
