New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The HDMI Cable Discussion - Page 16

post #226 of 338

Hey guys. I don't really subscribe to the whole its $300 so it must be a nicer hdmi cable thing, but what about optical cables? Does a higher price mean a nicer cable?

post #227 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by SixthFall View Post

Hey guys. I don't really subscribe to the whole its $300 so it must be a nicer hdmi cable thing, but what about optical cables? Does a higher price mean a nicer cable?



Most optical cables are plastic fiber. *Some* of the more expensive ones have glass fibers which are manufactured for industrial / telecommunication purposes. Depending on the density and number of glass fibers the cost of production goes up. Note glass toslink cables have almost no flexibility (or they would shatter obviously) so may not be practical for home use and are commercially used for long distance underground pipe runs. I had some custom made from 470-strand fiber glass and can't say I really heard a difference.

 

That said a lot of expensive optical cables are nothing more than plastic cables with a huge brand mark up.


Edited by astrallite - 3/11/12 at 4:17pm
post #228 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post



Most optical cables are plastic fiber. *Some* of the more expensive ones have glass fibers which are manufactured for industrial / telecommunication purposes. Depending on the density and number of glass fibers the cost of production goes up. Note glass toslink cables have almost no flexibility (or they would shatter obviously) so may not be practical for home use and are commercially used for long distance underground pipe runs. I had some custom made from 470-strand fiber glass and can't say I really heard a difference.

 

That said a lot of expensive optical cables are nothing more than plastic cables with a huge brand mark up.

Hmm kind of thought as much, thnks.
 

 

post #229 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post



Funny enough, only my monoprice cables have gone bad. I've ordered 7 of from them and 3 had to be sent for warranty replacement because they weren't properly soldered to the tang and the signal kept dropping out.


You could still order twice the amount of cables you need from Monoprice for less than you would pay buying them at any retail store though.  Personally I've never had any issues with their cables but the longest HDMI cable I've needed to use is only 8 feet.

 

post #230 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltairDusk View Post


You could still order twice the amount of cables you need from Monoprice for less than you would pay buying them at any retail store though.  Personally I've never had any issues with their cables but the longest HDMI cable I've needed to use is only 8 feet.

 



I buy from Amazon now...cheaper than monoprice and gets here the 2nd day after I order. wink_face.gif

post #231 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by astrallite View Post



Funny enough, only my monoprice cables have gone bad. I've ordered 7 of from them and 3 had to be sent for warranty replacement because they weren't properly soldered to the tang and the signal kept dropping out.

Then you buy a dozen, like I did. If one goes bad or has an issue, you replace it. That's still 100s of times cheaper.
post #232 of 338
A headphone is a headphone, a vinyl needle is a vinyl needle, so why pay for the top end when they are all the same?

Cables (analog) are tone controls of the most minute adjustment. They balance a sound based on the components used. IMO

Digital cables are much more in question as to having any observable influence but I've not had enough experience to make an absolute opinion. How can one make an analog adjustment to a digital signal?
Edited by Happy Camper - 3/13/12 at 11:26pm
post #233 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

A headphone is a headphone, a vinyl needle is a vinyl needle, so why pay for the top end when they are all the same?
Cables (analog) are tone controls of the most minute adjustment. They balance a sound based on the components used. IMO
Digital cables are much more in question as to having any observable influence but I've not had enough experience to make an absolute opinion. How can one make an analog adjustment to a digital signal?


I'm not sure what you're trying to go for with your first line. If you're trying to compare analogue to digital, then I think it's clear why they aren't directly comparable.

 

Analogue cables have more of a basis as to how they could affect a signal, though the extent is still a little questionable. This is something I, admittedly, have not done a whole lot of research on. As far as I can tell, your description is fairly accurate. They don't make massive differences, but can be used for fine tuning purposes. I definitely think that a lot of people fall victim to the placebo effect with analogue cables as well, but I think actual differences do play a role.

 

Consistent information indicates that there should not be a difference between digital cables. There are claims of differences without consistency or questionable methods used to test differences. What do you mean with your comment about analogue adjustment to digital signal? Are you asking how you would make an adjustment, similar to an analogue signal's adjustment, to a digital signal? If so, then you would basically have to emulate it or control it from the signal source or have some sort of device alter the signal before it reaches the receiving device. Something like an EQ setting would be an example. You won't see a digital cable make a "shift" in sound or images. By shift, I mean something like a general change in bass or treble for sound or a change in stuff like contrast or colors for images.

 

Thinking of digital audio seems easiest to me. When a digital signal is sent, it is just a stream of sampled audio data. This data is recorded as 0's and 1's. A cable isn't going to only affect something like bass, for example. When the digital signal is going through the cable, it would have to reinterpret the data in order for it to make a change like that. It's not something that could be changed by something like a change in just the materials.

post #234 of 338
As to the initial statement, people think a cable is a cable and that there are no differences in performance. Do they also consider a baseline headphone to be the same as the flagship model using the same driver? Is the basic vinyl needle the same as the flagship model, they are both needles after all. The same analogy people use for cables you wouldn't need to spend any more than a basic headphone or a basic needle to get the same performance as the flagship models.

The statement about a digital cable making an analog adjustment to the sound is rubbish. The signal in the digital realm hasn't been converted yet so I don't see how a digital cable can influence what you hear in your headphones. It can't improve bass extension or unveil the highs.
post #235 of 338

I have an interesting analogous discussion here.

 

How does Headphone Break-In/Burn-In philosophy compare to the HDMI discussion?

 

Is it a myth, is it real, is it Placebo or is it only applied with specific headphones?

post #236 of 338
post #237 of 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

As to the initial statement, people think a cable is a cable and that there are no differences in performance. Do they also consider a baseline headphone to be the same as the flagship model using the same driver? Is the basic vinyl needle the same as the flagship model, they are both needles after all. The same analogy people use for cables you wouldn't need to spend any more than a basic headphone or a basic needle to get the same performance as the flagship models.


That was kind of a point I was making. They aren't comparable products and there are reasons one could, and does, make a difference and the other does not matter.


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotor102 View Post

I have an interesting analogous discussion here.

 

How does Headphone Break-In/Burn-In philosophy compare to the HDMI discussion?

 

Is it a myth, is it real, is it Placebo or is it only applied with specific headphones?


 

First, I'd like to point out that they aren't exactly analogous. Similar to my above point, there is actually a proposed reason explaining burn-in and it's rooted in the basic understanding of how the product works. They are both debated topics, but the actual arguments are vastly different.

 

I do believe that burn-in can occur, though I haven't seen enough evidence to conclusively say it does. I'm not sure how you'd reliably test it, short of having quite a few of the same headphone being measured over time. I do think that more happens with the listener than with the headphone. People will become accustomed to a headphone and, in a way, adapt their perceptions of it. It's another situation that needs to be tested with quantitative measures before we can really be sure. There's definitely a basis for the argument in support of burn-in, though it's hardly conclusive. I can't say I've personally noticed anything because I tend to assume my perception is changing, but I definitely think it's possible.

 

The original idea is most likely not placebo. I'd assume it was first considered because someone was listening to a speaker or headphone and had changed perceptions of it over time. They probably didn't expect a change with time at first. Becoming accustomed to something new is definitely not a placebo. That said, the placebo definitely plays a role now. I'm not saying it's the sole factor, but it will definitely affect perceptions.

post #238 of 338

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotor102 View Post

I have an interesting analogous discussion here.

 

How does Headphone Break-In/Burn-In philosophy compare to the HDMI discussion?

 

Is it a myth, is it real, is it Placebo or is it only applied with specific headphones?


Good one. I don't think anyone who's been in a physics class argues burn-in occurs. Although people like to argue in terms of "burn-in happens or not", that's an oversimplification. The real question should be: can the human audition notice it or not? I believe in most cases it cannot, the differences should be very small. But until someone can explain how a cellulose or some other synthetic polymer diaphragm can suffer pressure shifts in miliseconds for days and not acquire micro-crevices and dents, I think it's safe to assume a driver driver change over time. But like other users have mentioned, our hearing memory is really crappy compared with other amazing stuff the human body has, so it's much easier for us to believe we heard a difference than to actually notice it. And even in high-end models there's enough variation so that a burned-in model and a not burned-in have differences from the beginning that are not related to burn-in, and I think they might even in some cases surpass the differences a driver suffers from burn-in. So it's not at all a black-and-white subject.

post #239 of 338

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Camper View Post

As to the initial statement, people think a cable is a cable and that there are no differences in performance. Do they also consider a baseline headphone to be the same as the flagship model using the same driver? Is the basic vinyl needle the same as the flagship model, they are both needles after all. The same analogy people use for cables you wouldn't need to spend any more than a basic headphone or a basic needle to get the same performance as the flagship models.
The statement about a digital cable making an analog adjustment to the sound is rubbish. The signal in the digital realm hasn't been converted yet so I don't see how a digital cable can influence what you hear in your headphones. It can't improve bass extension or unveil the highs.


I don't understand. Are you saying there are differences in analog cable performances? Of course, if you consider like normal copper vs OCC copper, or better yet, vs OCC silver. Can humans perceive those differences in headphones? Definitely not as much as they say, and probably not enough for most to pass double-blind tests even with high-end headphones.

 

Now what puzzles me is the analogy. Are you saying that because there are differences in needles or headphones with different enclosures, there is a comparable number of differences in cables? Because I don't even know where to start.

post #240 of 338
Thread Starter 


in all honesty - I have noticed break-in with EVERY SINGLE Dynamic

Not with BA's - apart from me getting used to it - aka: brain burn-in.

 

I don't really have to prove how burn-in changes. And it really isn't psychological.

Honestly - listen to TFTA 1XB's out the box, then listen to them after 50hrs.

I could list all my earphones I've heard that have changed with burn-in...

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: