HDMI cable made it worse!!!

[HMtheJJ]

Originally Posted by BStecke

Actually, YES . . . if the PS3 is only set to output @ 480p, then obviously it's not setup properly. The PS3 wouldn't output nothing just by changing to HDMI.

NO, my point was changin from one type of cable to the other, PS3 won't display properly unless he reset the system, so there was no way he made a mistake!

[BStecke]

You don't have to reset the whole thing. You just have to go into the display options, hit automatic, and it'll set it up for the maximum resolution of the TV. Like I said before. You can change the output on the fly without resetting the whole thing. People do it for GTA IV.

[HMtheJJ]

Originally Posted by BStecke

You don't have to reset the whole thing. You just have to go into the display options, hit automatic, and it'll set it up for the maximum resolution of the TV. Like I said before. You can change the output on the fly without resetting the whole thing. People do it for GTA IV.

oh my god, PS3 video output setting 101, if you change from one type of cable to the other, in this case to a HDMI cable, if you power up your PS3, the TV will blank, so there is NO way to set anything from video setting, what you have to do is press and HOLD the power button for more than 5 secs, until the screen is auto configured properly by your PS3 and HDMI cable.

'nuff said man i dont have to explain a simple design and how HDMI cable works, you can try it with your own PS3 or look up online!

[Ranger-R]

Has anyone seen the episode of The Office where Micheal is watching his plasma tv at the dinner party? This thread reminds me of this.

[sleazypig]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

All of the above EXCEPT THE YAHOO THAT STATED $8 HDMI IS CRAP!

MONSTER CABLES cost less than $10 to manufacture!!!

Hey jerky I did not post that he should get a monster cable. All I said was he should get something better than a $8.00 cable.

[JasonR]

Originally Posted by Ranger-R

Has anyone seen the episode of The Office where Micheal is watching his plasma tv at the dinner party? This thread reminds me of this.

That episode was hilarious.

[BStecke]

We're both talking about two different things. Obviously he's getting output from the PS3 since he's getting a picture, so we're already past that. Now the question is if he's set it up to output @ 720p, or if it's still outputting 480p.

Originally Posted by sleazypig

Hey jerky I did not post that he should get a monster cable. All I said was he should get something better than a $8.00 cable.

You're right. A good number of people (maybe even the majority) buy the ones from Monoprice that are even cheaper.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by sleazypig

Hey jerky I did not post that he should get a monster cable. All I said was he should get something better than a $8.00 cable.

And my point wasn't that you tried to tell him to get a Monster Cable. My point in bringing up Monster was to use an extreme example of how the price of an HDMI cable has no reflection on quality. An $8 HDMI cable (which you say is poor quality) is, in fact, the same design as a $140 Monster cable (which costs less than $10 to make). Therefore, the price of the cable purchase is irrelevant when attempting to measure the quality of the cable.

[DutchBoy]

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by horrorfreak889

So i finally got an HDMI cable, after being screamed at on this website from people saying "You arent using an hdmi cable!! your stupid!" Well I am new to this whole bluray thing. I have a 26 inch lcd hdtv, and a sony bluray player. I got the hdmi cables from amazon.com, they were about $8 and i hooked it up. I know i hooked it up in the right spot, because there is only 2 areas where you can plug it in correctly. Anyway, i poped in a movie, and noticed no change in the PQ/SQ. When I play regular dvds, the picture looks worse.....

So basically I wasted my money

What brand is your 26" TV? Sony, Samsung? Or is it something like Magnavox. Also do you know the native resolution and contrast ratio? Cheep sets can have a contrast like 800:1, and a <720p 800x600 resolution. A set with this kind of spec can often show little in the way of better PQ over analogue. We owned a 26" LCD Magnavox at one time (they got it behind my back). It really strutted its stuff with analogue RF cable, but DVD PQ was just terrable. Thank God they got rid of it. We got $500 for a used set!

On the other hand, our 32" 720p 4,000:1 contrast Samsung LCD being fed a 720p signal off a PS3, the diffrence between analoge and HDMI is very apparent.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by Craig Ruchman

What brand is your 26" TV? Sony, Samsung? Or is it something like Magnavox. Also do you know the native resolution and contrast ratio? Cheep sets will have a contrast like 800:1, and a 800x600 resolution. A set with this kind of spec will show little in the way of better PQ over analogue. I have a 4,000:1 contrast 720P Samsung LCD using the PS3. The diffrence between analoge and HDMI is very apparent.

It's an Element. It's in his signature

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by BStecke

It's an Element. It's in his signature

Never heard of them... Sounds like a Wal-Mart 1080i (but really 769p) waste of materials to me.

[BStecke]

I don't know anything about it. I'm kind of trying to help the dude instead of bashing his stuff . . . everybody starts somewhere.

[brett_day]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

Never heard of them... Sounds like a Wal-Mart 1080i (but really 769p) waste of materials to me.

thats a little disrespectful dude...maybe it is a "waste of materials" to you but heck everyone starts somewhere! Lets just try and help the OP out

[sleazypig]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

And my point wasn't that you tried to tell him to get a Monster Cable. My point in bringing up Monster was to use an extreme example of how the price of an HDMI cable has no reflection on quality. An $8 HDMI cable (which you say is poor quality) is, in fact, the same design as a $140 Monster cable (which costs less than $10 to make). Therefore, the price of the cable purchase is irrelevant when attempting to measure the quality of the cable.

Ok it may cost 8.00 dollars to make a monster cable but everybody has to mark things up to make a profit. So the 8.00 cables probably cost 25 cents to make which means its a cheaply made cable. The best bang for your buck is to get a 30.00 cable. (defineatly not a monster). You don't want to get riped off but you don't want to buy crap either.

[JasonR]

Originally Posted by sleazypig

Ok it may cost 8.00 dollars to make a monster cable but everybody has to mark things up to make a profit. So the 8.00 cables probably cost 25 cents to make which means its a cheaply made cable. The best bang for your buck is to get a 30.00 cable. (defineatly not a monster). You don't want to get riped off but you don't want to buy crap either.

So a cable costing thirty dollars makes it better automatically than an eight dollar cable? I'll do one better, I'll put a FREE DirectTV HDMI cable up against the thirty dollar cable any day.

[BStecke]

Originally Posted by JasonR

So a cable costing thirty dollars makes it better automatically than an eight dollar cable? I'll do one better, I'll put a FREE DirectTV HDMI cable up against the thirty dollar cable any day.

Blasphemy!

[brett_day]

ok THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN HDMI CABLES (apart from versions 1.0 thru 1.3a) whether they are $3.00 or $300...there is no difference

All the cables do is carry the digital signal, a bunch of ones and zero's...........01000111101011000011000111 etc. The digital singal will not degrade in any way, shape or form while travelling the length of the cable......

once the signal reaches the tv, thats where you are seeing the difference and even then it is only to due with the way the TV handles the signal! It has nothing...nothing to do with the cable....I have monster cables....I have $3.00 monoprice cables, can i or anyone else tell a difference? NO because there is no difference in the cables! They all do the same thing!

All i can say is Bravo to Monster...their marketing department came up with a bunch of long, impressive sounding words that make you think you are getting a superior product, when you are not....I fell for the marketing too...but have learnt my lesson.

If you are a monster fan then thats great, i hope you enjoy your cables and empty wallets, but you have to understand...there is no difference..an hdmi cable is an hdmi cable is an hdmi cable....

the only difference between my $3.00 monoprice hdmi cable and a monster cable, is that my $3.00 cable does not claim to have a super-flujamahatchy in it like the monster one does! Oh by the way that super-flujamahatchy does do one thing for monster...it rakes in another $117 for the company, and keeps the monster marketing teams in their jobs!

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by brett_day

ok THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN HDMI CABLES (apart from versions 1.0 thru 1.3a) whether they are $3.00 or $300...there is no difference

All the cables do is carry the digital signal, a bunch of ones and zero's...........01000111101011000011000111 etc. The digital singal will not degrade in any way, shape or form while travelling the length of the cable......

once the signal reaches the tv, thats where you are seeing the difference and even then it is only to due with the way the TV handles the signal! It has nothing...nothing to do with the cable....I have monster cables....I have $3.00 monoprice cables, can i or anyone else tell a difference? NO because there is no difference in the cables! They all do the same thing!

All i can say is Bravo to Monster...their marketing department came up with a bunch of long, impressive sounding words that make you think you are getting a superior product, when you are not....I fell for the marketing too...but have learnt my lesson.

If you are a monster fan then thats great, i hope you enjoy your cables and empty wallets, but you have to understand...there is no difference..an hdmi cable is an hdmi cable is an hdmi cable....

the only difference between my $3.00 monoprice hdmi cable and a monster cable, is that my $3.00 cable does not claim to have a super-flujamahatchy in it like the monster one does! Oh by the way that super-flujamahatchy does do one thing for monster...it rakes in another $117 for the company, and keeps the monster marketing teams in their jobs!

Im not positive on this, but Im 95% sure there is no difference in cables that claim to be 1.3a and the rest of the cables out there. all that should matter is if your input/outputs are 1.3a compliant, the type of cable you use really doesn't matter.

the only thing to keep in mind when getting an HDMI cable is the warrent, i had a cheap ($20) Wal-mart one crap out on me, so I went with the official PS3 one which was about $35. But from what I hear, monoprice.com is awesome for HDMI cables (I didn't know about them when I got my cable).

[brett_day]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

Im not positive on this, but Im 95% sure there is no difference in cables that claim to be 1.3a and the rest of the cables out there. all that should matter is if your input/outputs are 1.3a compliant, the type of cable you use really doesn't matter.

the only thing to keep in mind when getting an HDMI cable is the warrent, i had a cheap ($20) Wal-mart one crap out on me, so I went with the official PS3 one which was about $35. But from what I hear, monoprice.com is awesome for HDMI cables (I didn't know about them when I got my cable).

There is a difference in the version....the difference comes in the amount of bandwidth that the cables can carry....below is a breif passage on the difference between the versions

Each subsequent version of the specification uses the same cables, but increases the throughput and/or capabilities of what can be transmitted over the cable. For example, previously, the maximum pixel clock rate of the interface was 165 MHz, sufficient for supporting 1080p at 60 Hz or WUXGA (1920x1200) at 60 Hz, but HDMI 1.3 increased that to 340 MHz, providing support for WQXGA (2560x1600) and beyond across a single digital link. See also: HDMI Versions.

HDMI also includes support for 8-channel uncompressed digital audio at 192 kHz sample rate with 24 bits/sample as well as any compressed stream such as Dolby Digital, or DTS. HDMI supports up to 8 channels of one-bit audio, such as that used on Super Audio CDs at rates up to 4x that used by Super Audio CD. With version 1.3, HDMI now also supports lossless compressed streams such as Dolby TrueHD and DTS-HD Master Audio

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-De...edia_Interface