difference in HDMI cables

[jkpitcher3]

I am getting a new receiver today so I can have all the next gen audio. I have been looking at all the HMDI cables and the guy at the store said if it does not say 1.3a then it will not do the 7.1 channel surround, just the 5.1. I was wanting to know if that is true. I have always been told on all the forums that all HDMI cables are the same just some cost a lot more because of the brand.

[Sonny]

There are HDMI cables that are "rated" quote on quote, but that sales person is just blowing smoke up your @$$....they want you to buy the 100+$ Monster cable ! monoprice.com Thats all anyboady needs to know I spent less then 5$ each on my HDMI cables & of course they work perfect I get all the Lossless Audio & everything Hope this helps.

[hc666]

Go to Wallyworld and get a cable. Save some money

I use RCA/Phillips HMDI cables from Wallyworld and get 7.1 no prob through my receiver.

[bootman]

How long is the run?
If it is under 3-4M, then anything at Mono is fine.
Longer runs require special cables if you want to keep 1.3 specs throughout. (no, not Monster!)

[Blinkman987]

You should buy the most expensive Monster Cable you can.

[Mouse]

All I got to say is I don't trust cables that only cost $5. It seems like the cost to manufacture them should be more. It's like the old saying, "You get what you pay for." ... in other words "Cheap price equals cheap quality." I have all Sony equipment so I went with Sony HDMI cables that are certified for 1.3a even tho they are only 1 meter long (3 feet). Except the official Sony PS3 HDMI cable... it's a bit longer than 1 meter and is also extremely good quality.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Mouse

All I got to say is I don't trust cables that only cost $5. It seems like the cost to manufacture them should be more. It's like the old saying, "You get what you pay for." ... in other words "Cheap price equals cheap quality." I have all Sony equipment so I went with Sony HDMI cables that are certified for 1.3a even tho they are only 1 meter long (3 feet). Except the official Sony PS3 HDMI cable... it's a bit longer than 1 meter and is also extremely good quality.

Don't believe anything in this post. While I have nothing against your personal preferences, that has nothing to do with how the stuff works.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by Mouse

All I got to say is I don't trust cables that only cost $5. It seems like the cost to manufacture them should be more. It's like the old saying, "You get what you pay for." ... in other words "Cheap price equals cheap quality." I have all Sony equipment so I went with Sony HDMI cables that are certified for 1.3a even tho they are only 1 meter long (3 feet). Except the official Sony PS3 HDMI cable... it's a bit longer than 1 meter and is also extremely good quality.

Cool! Your a sucker what can I say....

[obiwopkenobi62]

Originally Posted by Sonny

Cool! Your a sucker what can I say....

Sorry, the expensive cables are just that, more expensive. I have personally tested my system with expensive vs. cheap HDMI cables and there is no difference. Period. I have had friends buy a 350.00 HTIB and then spend a couple hundred dollars on HDMI cables. Ridiculous. Unless you have tested the cables like I have you can't sit there and tell people they are suckers for buying cheaper cables.
The industry, especially Monster has brainwashed a large chunk of consumers into believing that more expensive cables are better.
There was even a case where there were side by side HDTV's with the same DVD playing. One looked worse than the other. The sign said something like see the difference between Monster HDMI and Regular HDMI. Guess what, the person took a picture of the hookups with his cell phone. One TV had Monster HDMI and the other TV was hooked up with RCA jacks.
Talk about deceiving people. I am convinced that these places will do just about anything to get people to buy these high dollar cables. The one I am running right now to my Mit 73"DLP HDTV cost me 1.87 cents at Amazon.com. Guess what, absolutely no difference in quality compared to my 40.00 dollar cable I was running.
They say, the proof is in the pudding, well it is.

[richteer]

Originally Posted by jkpitcher3

I am getting a new receiver today so I can have all the next gen audio. I have been looking at all the HMDI cables and the guy at the store said if it does not say 1.3a then it will not do the 7.1 channel surround, just the 5.1. I was wanting to know if that is true. I have always been told on all the forums that all HDMI cables are the same just some cost a lot more because of the brand.

Many (most?) people here will assert that all HDMI cables are alike, but I've been interested in high end audio long enough to know that just about everything has effect on sound (and presumably, video) quality. So I would personally steer clear of bargain basement cables and go for something better.

Now, I've yet to do a comparison of HDMI cables (and I've yet to see one published by a source I would trust for such things), so can't state that a 3 or 4 figure HDMI cable is better than a $50 one. But I'd be willing to assert that a $50 cable is better than a $5 one.

I look at it this way: my stereo audio system--excluding cables--is worth about $30K. I'm not going to compromise its performance by using el-cheapo crappy cables (well, unless they're a temporary measure while I save for the real thing)! The rule of thumb audiophiles use is that one should spend about 10% of the system's cost on cables. I imagine the same rule would server videophiles just as well.

[Y3k Bug]

Originally Posted by richteer

...I've been interested in high end audio long enough to know that just about everything has effect on sound (and presumably, video) quality.

And that's where the confusion lies. In an analog world cables had a tremendous effect on sound (and video), but since HDMI is digital, as long as the cable is capable of carrying enough of the signal so that the 1's and 0's don't get messed up, it will sound EXACTLY the same as a cable that is more expensive.

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by obiwopkenobi62

Sorry, the expensive cables are just that, more expensive. I have personally tested my system with expensive vs. cheap HDMI cables and there is no difference. Period. I have had friends buy a 350.00 HTIB and then spend a couple hundred dollars on HDMI cables. Ridiculous. Unless you have tested the cables like I have you can't sit there and tell people they are suckers for buying cheaper cables.
The industry, especially Monster has brainwashed a large chunk of consumers into believing that more expensive cables are better.
There was even a case where there were side by side HDTV's with the same DVD playing. One looked worse than the other. The sign said something like see the difference between Monster HDMI and Regular HDMI. Guess what, the person took a picture of the hookups with his cell phone. One TV had Monster HDMI and the other TV was hooked up with RCA jacks.
Talk about deceiving people. I am convinced that these places will do just about anything to get people to buy these high dollar cables. The one I am running right now to my Mit 73"DLP HDTV cost me 1.87 cents at Amazon.com. Guess what, absolutely no difference in quality compared to my 40.00 dollar cable I was running.
They say, the proof is in the pudding, well it is.

read the thread. I have all monoprice , so I don't even know what your talking about , & neither do you for that matter...I was calling the guy who paid a bunch for cables the sucker. Wake up!

[un4gvn94538]

Originally Posted by Mouse

All I got to say is I don't trust cables that only cost $5. It seems like the cost to manufacture them should be more. It's like the old saying, "You get what you pay for." ... in other words "Cheap price equals cheap quality." I have all Sony equipment so I went with Sony HDMI cables that are certified for 1.3a even tho they are only 1 meter long (3 feet). Except the official Sony PS3 HDMI cable... it's a bit longer than 1 meter and is also extremely good quality.

*cough*bose*cough*

[Sonny]

Originally Posted by richteer

Many (most?) people here will assert that all HDMI cables are alike, but I've been interested in high end audio long enough to know that just about everything has effect on sound (and presumably, video) quality. So I would personally steer clear of bargain basement cables and go for something better.

Now, I've yet to do a comparison of HDMI cables (and I've yet to see one published by a source I would trust for such things), so can't state that a 3 or 4 figure HDMI cable is better than a $50 one. But I'd be willing to assert that a $50 cable is better than a $5 one.

I look at it this way: my stereo audio system--excluding cables--is worth about $30K. I'm not going to compromise its performance by using el-cheapo crappy cables (well, unless they're a temporary measure while I save for the real thing)! The rule of thumb audiophiles use is that one should spend about 10% of the system's cost on cables. I imagine the same rule would server videophiles just as well.

I'll put any of my "El Cheapo" monoprice cables against yours any day

[jkpitcher3]

Thanks for the information. I already have some cheaper hdmi cables adn the video is just as good as the expensive one I have. I had just never heard about not being able to receive the 7.1 lossless audio through the cheaper ones before. It isn't the first time someone from store told me a flat lie.

[obiwopkenobi62]

Originally Posted by Sonny

read the thread. I have all monoprice , so I don't even know what your talking about , & neither do you for that matter...I was calling the guy who paid a bunch for cables the sucker. Wake up!

You read the thread too, I was agreeing with you. Damn.

[Mxr5150]

I can understand using a 5$ HDMI for a cable box or an upcovert player, but a Blu-Ray in most cases... I think the cheapest Monster is worth it.

[Grif32]

Originally Posted by obiwopkenobi62

You read the thread too, I was agreeing with you. Damn.

At first you didnt but then you edited your post to make it look like you did.

Thats why he responded...

Your quote

"Unless you have tested the cables like I have you can't sit there and tell people they are suckers for buying cheaper cables"

He was calling the guy buying Expensive cables a sucker.

[Grif32]

Originally Posted by Mxr5150

I can understand using a 5$ HDMI for a cable box or an upcovert player, but a Blu-Ray in most cases... I think the cheapest Monster is worth it.

Use your "Cheap" monster if there is such a thing and I will use my $5 HDMI cable on my BR.

There is NO difference's unless you have long runs.

[obiwopkenobi62]

I would never buy Monster cables ever. Like I said I have tried expensive vs. cheap in my home theater and there was no difference. None. I don't understand why folks don't believe this. It's not like I haven't tested it. Test it for yourself and you will see what I am talking about. If you haven't done the test, how can you say the more expensive ones are better than the cheaper ones?