[Steve Eddy]

I refuse to call people morons and partake in discussion with anyone who use label-sticking instead of reasonable arguments.

Who did I call a moron? No one. I said it would take a moron to design a cable with so much inductance and/or capacitance so to have an actual audible effect. Do you know of anyone designing such cables?

se

 

[jbarrentine]

  Yeah, though that's one case where you really can sometimes see the difference with a really cheap (probably non-spec compliant) cable over very long runs. Of course, that's running a much higher frequency signal, with much higher bandwidth requirements. It's also not subtle when something's going wrong - digital interconnects are a very binary thing (heh). They either work or they don't, and if they aren't working you'll know it.

 
hdmi isn't intended for very long runs anyway. My post stands: we would see a difference in anything meeting spec and we don't. There's no difference in audio cable. People can cry about it all they want, in blind tests people couldn't identify coat hangers vs monster cable. 

 

[Steve Eddy]

Cables absolutely make a difference. My system sounds infinitely better with cables than without cables!

Yeah. Bluetooth sucks!

se

 

[Music Alchemist]

I said it would take a moron to design a cable with so much inductance and/or capacitance so to have an actual audible effect. Do you know of anyone designing such cables?

 
What are your thoughts on the STAX Lambda series? I've read a lot of info about how the reason they sound different is because of the different cables.
 
My previous post on the subject, for reference:
 

  It's interesting that you mention that, because the current STAX Lambda series (ranging from $390 to $925 retail) all have the same drivers, yet sound different, and the main differences between them are the cables, with varying resistance and capacitance. (Some also have different pads and enclosures.)

 

[jbarrentine]

"I can determine the type/ ages of violins used by each performer." - referring to what a different dac allows this person (who shall remain unnamed) to supposedly hear. 
 
This was in a recent thread here on headfi. People are going to imagine they can hear whatever they want to imagine they can hear. 

 

[Steve Eddy]

What are your thoughts on the STAX Lambda series? I've read a lot of info about how the reason they sound different is because of the different cables.

My previous post on the subject, for reference:

So they're identical in every other respect except for the cables?

se

 

[Music Alchemist]

So they're identical in every other respect except for the cables?

se

 
I believe so, though at least the more expensive one has different ear pads and enclosure.
 
You can take a look at models 207 through 507 here: https://www.staxusa.com/earspeaker/
 
It may also be worth doing further research on the differences between them, if you care to go to the trouble.

 

[Steve Eddy]

I believe so, though at least the more expensive one has different ear pads and enclosure.

That alone can cause audible differences.

But then, you haven't actually established there are audible differences other than your simply saying thatntheynsound different to you. That doesn't establish an actual audible difference.

You can take a look at models 207 through 507 here: https://www.staxusa.com/earspeaker/

It may also be worth doing further research on the differences between them, if you care to go to the trouble.

No time. And it wouldn't be worth it if I did until an actual audible difference was established.

se

 

[superjawes]

If there were a difference we would see it in the video world and don't. One hdmi cable is just like another if they meet the same minimum standards. 

I should start by saying that I am a "cable skeptic", but this is an apples and oranges comparison. HDMI is a digital signal that uses differential signaling. This makes the signal quite resilient to all sorts of variations (conductors, local noise, etc.), and any cable will be based on pass/fail criteria. You're either getting the signal or you aren't.

Most audio cables we would be talking about here are passing continuous-time (analog) signals, and any change in the electrical properties can and will change the signal. The cable is essentially adding a resistor between the source and transducer, so the signal might still get through, but it will be distorted.

Now, to protect my "skeptic" cred...it is very, very easy to design a cable where any imperfections (namely, cable resistance) are far below audibility, and any "improvement" would be negligible. The electrical properties of a cable are going to be resistance, capacitance, and inductance, and the materials you use are going to give these values per unit length, making it easy to know the minimum requirements to create a "good" cable.

(tl;dr: yes, there's a lot of voodoo surrounding cable sales, but designer HDMI cables are a special brand of nonsense.)

 

[cjl]

(tl;dr: yes, there's a lot of voodoo surrounding cable sales, but designer HDMI cables are a special brand of nonsense.)

Yep, and I spent 20 minutes arguing with the salesman at Best Buy when helping my father set up his home theater - the salesman was aghast that we were buying a high end TV (Panasonic ZT-60) and an $8 HDMI cable, and he kept trying to convince us that we should get an $80-100 cable to take "full advantage" of the picture quality of the TV. Fortunately, my dad didn't buy it, but it was pretty amusing to hear all the arguments.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Yep, and I spent 20 minutes arguing with the salesman at Best Buy when helping my father set up his home theater - the salesman was aghast that we were buying a high end TV (Panasonic ZT-60) and an $8 HDMI cable, and he kept trying to convince us that we should get an $80-100 cable to take "full advantage" of the picture quality of the TV. Fortunately, my dad didn't buy it, but it was pretty amusing to hear all the arguments.

 
It would have been awesome if you had convinced the salesman to take out the cables and compare them, just to prove your point.

 

[superjawes]

Maybe it would make sense to spend $40 on an HDMI cable because you haven't heard of Monoprice and your big box store only carries a $40 cable...

...and it's still 2007.

 

[dvw]

HDMI cables have to be certified before they can bear the HDMI logo. There are cables with the logo but not certified. HDMI forum is actively pursuing violators and suing them for the violation.The boutique cables are most likely not certified, You will be taking a huge risk by paying a substantial price for a maybe a substandard cable.

 

[superjawes]

The HDMI licensing is only about collecting royalties. The forum a flat annual fee from each adopter AND a per-device fee. The per-device fee actually goes down if you get certified and use the logo, but you still owe $0.15/device even if you don't use the logo.

 

[Shaffer]

I have several very inexpensive HDMI cables ($6-$12) from Amazon and a Monoprice. The picture quality is noticeably more sharp and vivid with one of the cables vs the others. Yea, I know they're supposed to be all the same; when it comes to enjoying video content I use the one that looks best (it's so obvious, my children can easily see the difference). Frankly, one can discuss this for years, but to what end, if one chooses to disregard the first step in the Scientific Method and simply parrots what he was told?