[Sonic 748i]

This is a pretty interesting video I found created by a Monster employee explaining how digital lives in a analog world:

 

[Iniamyen]

This is a fine explanation but the effects he talks about would manifest themselves as missing pixels and dropped audio signals (which he briefly mentions.) There's no sliding scale of quality, as the receiver still interprets either a "1" or a "0." Most cost effective solution: Buy the cheapest cable that WORKS. For me, this is usually something other than Monster.
 
There's nothing really incorrect about the information presented, but if you are dealing with errors in your HDMI signal, chances are it's not related to these effects because for normal cable lengths they aren't an issue, rather it's your source or receiver. So it is a tad misleading.

 

[ford2]

 
 
 
A Monster tech talking about Monster cables,I would take that with a grain of salt.

 

[High_Q]

Digital lives in an analog world...

  Thats a good one.  You seem to take this video vary seriously sonic. You thinking about investing in a high quality digital cable that would give you much stronger 1 or 0 signal?

 

[greenrenewables]

No sure why, but this guy doesn't scream credibility. Perhaps he should wear glasses and a pocket protector to up his cred

 

[Arjisme]

Quote:

A Monster tech talking about Monster cables,I would take that with a grain of salt.

Actually, he didn't really talk much about Monster cables.  He also didn't explain how a Monster cable addresses the potential timing and resistance issues he described.  And, he gave no information as to whether those issues are likely to be significant with any given HDMI cable.
 

 

[Sonic 748i]

Quote:

Digital lives in an analog world...

  Thats a good one.  You seem to take this video vary seriously sonic. You thinking about investing in a high quality digital cable that would give you much stronger 1 or 0 signal?

Nope, the HDMI cable being used to feed my Samsung LED HDTV is showing no picture quality errors. I did pay $50 for the cable though...

 

[High_Q]

Quote:

Nope, the HDMI cable being used to feed my Samsung LED HDTV is showing no picture quality errors. I did pay $50 for the cable though...

 $50??  I hope you got the quality you were looking for.

 To prevent picture quality errors?  Didn't know there was such thing.

 

 

[xnor]

Well this guy explained it pretty well, you don't need to buy their cables unless you get sparkling and audio drop-outs ...

 

[ford2]

Quote:

Actually, he didn't really talk much about Monster cables.  He also didn't explain how a Monster cable addresses the potential timing and resistance issues he described.  And, he gave no information as to whether those issues are likely to be significant with any given HDMI cable.
 

So.?
 

 

[Arjisme]

 
Quote:

So.?

 
Feelings hurt?  If so, it wasn't my intent.   I was just clarifying the bolded bit below.
Quote:

A Monster tech talking about Monster cables,I would take that with a grain of salt.

 
His comments were generic to to all HDMI cables.  However, I agree with you that I would take his comments with a grain of salt simply because he is a Monster employee and might have an incentive to mislead in making a case for their cables.
 

 

[plonter]

I have two optical cables.  one is dayton and the other is monster which i am now using regularely.    believe it or not,I found a difference in sound and i  prefer the monter over the dayton. by the way,its not a high priced monster cable from the newer models but an older cheaper one (cost me 50$).  I am not secesseraly saying it's better but just my preference.
 
I found the monster cable to have more punchy sound and just a tiny but more agressivness in presentation comparing to the dayton.  the difference is tiny but its there (at least for me) and it goes better with my system.    i will not spend over 100$ for a digital cable myself.

 

[Sonic 748i]

Quote:

I have two optical cables.  one is dayton and the other is monster which i am now using regularely.    believe it or not,I found a difference in sound and i  prefer the monter over the dayton. by the way,its not a high priced monster cable from the newer models but an older cheaper one (cost me 50$).  I am not secesseraly saying it's better but just my preference.
 
I found the monster cable to have more punchy sound and just a tiny but more agressivness in presentation comparing to the dayton.  the difference is tiny but its there (at least for me) and it goes better with my system.    i will not spend over 100$ for a digital cable myself.

Interesting...

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Interesting...

You'll also note he probably hasn't done a DBT, and so far there's never been a known example of a digital cable showing an audible difference if it's built to spec.
 
So it's not particularly interesting . . . it's quite a common claim from believers that they hear a difference in cables whether it's digital, analog, or power.

 

[plonter]

Quote:

Quote:

Interesting...

You'll also note he probably hasn't done a DBT, and so far there's never been a known example of a digital cable showing an audible difference if it's built to spec.
 
So it's not particularly interesting . . . it's quite a common claim from believers that they hear a difference in cables whether it's digital, analog, or power.

right..I have never done a DBT as i don't care that much about it,i just gave my opinion. I listen to lossless also but never done abx test to see if i hear the difference between flac and mp3...
second,i have a very good hearing and a good audio memory which i base my assumptions on.  for me,the difference is there.
 
if science would have proven that there shouldn't be an audible difference,we would not have this discussion right ..?