Monster Cable HDMI Scam

[Sethos]

1440p ... where the hell is that used :p ?

[shakey_snake]

lol. So the shape of whatever analog shape on the screen there is what tells you if something passes or fails?

And then it is up to who to decided what shape passes or fails?

lol. Classic marketing BullSh*t.

I can't believe you somehow believe that is authoritative Joel.

when I need a cable to support 1440p, I'll buy one, My ?15 5m cable is fine for me.

The HDMI spec is locked to certain resolutions. No "1440p" signals should even be decoded.

[Joel]

I can't believe you somehow believe that is authoritative Joel.

So testing is not authoritative now? :blink: How do you think any cable passes spec?

[Sethos]

1) At short distances up to 6ft (2 meters), you can pretty much get away with any cable. Monoprice cables kicked ass at the 6 foot length that mostly everyone uses.

Taken from that link, kinda settles this thing.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

Sigh.

The point has always been; all cables are not the same. This is proof. There were differences at less than 1440p in those tests, you know.

I know not all cables are the same, but every HDMI cables signal is the same - It either makes it properly, or it doesn't make it properly.

If any cable you buy doesn't carry over a signal of today's standards [not the futures], you return it for your money or get an exchange.

It's faulty, it's not part of the "you get what you pay for" motto.

When we're talking about crazy lengths of cable, we're entering a world where you may have to buy cables made with better protection, insulation, ect. However on NW people asking about HDMI cables 99% of the time as I said are hooking up something under their TV/near their TV which is why we give out the advice of "no there's no difference between working cables, buy cheap."

[hdood]

The point has always been; all cables are not the same. This is proof. There were differences at less than 1440p in those tests, you know.

Proof of what....?

The differences are minor and within specifications, which means there is no difference in the data received (ignoring the cables that failed completely and you'd probably end up returning).

[DrCheese]

There were differences at less than 1440p in those tests, you know.

Differences you CAN NOT SEE. Why are we still having this argument. It makes ZERO difference to the image or sound that you see and hear.

[Joel]

The HDMI spec is locked to certain resolutions.

Source? Mine say higher than even 1440.

[shakey_snake]

So testing is not authoritative now? :blink: How do you think any cable passes spec?

Please try addressing my questions.

[Joel]

Differences you CAN NOT SEE.

That's subjective. Saying all cables are the same should be objective.

No one could see the difference between more data moving from a BD or a HDDVD either. But that apparently DID make a difference when it came to marketing.

[PGHammer]

Because they can get filthy rich.

Monster do use high expense parts to manufacture the cables, but at the distances many people connect HDMI devices (1-3m on average), it does not matter.

Just let the people who don't educate themselves lose out on money, at the end of the day they think they're getting some sort of nasa approved super duper advanced cable that makes their picture 10x better, and know nothing otherwise.

Therefore they don't care...

Until they find out the $5 monoprice cable does the same thing, but that's the day a lesson is learned.

I would say intervene though if given the chance, and help someone save some money. Aside from that there's not much you can do, the internet clearly helps people on this topic all over the place, so if the buyer searches they'll find.

Best Buy promote such service as they probably earn quite a margin on cables that sell at such high prices.

This is far from unique to Monster; this is common among the high-end A/V connector market. (Radio Shack in particular was not well liked because they would not just sell decent pre-made lengths of such cable, but they would sell *bulk* spools along with nearly everything you needed to make custom-cabling every bit as good as the high-end stuff for far less. This is, in fact, the single thing that has kept them in business.) So don't blame Monster for continuing to exploit this *weakness*; the weakness itself is there because of consumer reliance on the *brand-name fallacy*.

Also, Monoprice does not sell retail, but e-tail. When consumers are not buying but seldom, and when they do, they are going to brick-and-mortar retailers, that's one less sale for Monoprice.

I have nothing against Monoprice, or their cables (I have, in fact, recommended Monoprice myself); but to select a company such as Monoprice, you must first get the prospective to do something he normally wouldn't.

[Joel]

Please try addressing my questions.

Where was the question?

[shakey_snake]

Questions end in question marks:

So the shape of whatever analog shape on the screen there is what tells you if something passes or fails?

And then it is up to who to decided what shape passes or fails?

[hdood]

That's subjective. Saying all cables are the same should be objective.

How is it subjective when the video signal received at the other end is 100% identical to the one sent?

[Joel]

Questions end in question marks:

Um, yes? What else defines the results of a test, a Ouija board?

How is it subjective when the video signal received at the other end is 100% identical to the one sent?

But they aren't. That's not to say that no one has even SEEN a difference, but if the info got there in a different way from one cable to the next, it's NOT the same, is it?

[DrCheese]

No one could see the difference between more data moving from a BD or a HDDVD either. But that apparently DID make a difference when it came to marketing.

Higher bitrate = Less compression artifacts and noise. Visible difference (Not so much at higher bitrates)

That's not to say that no one has even SEEN a difference, but if the info got there in a different way from one cable to the next, it's NOT the same, is it?

The error correction information makes it so. We've already had this conservation. If cable quality made a real difference in digital communication, the internet wouldn't work. Files would end up different on one system to the next.

[shakey_snake]

Um, yes? What else defines the results of a test, a Ouija board?

OK, I take it you're playing dense on purpose. I'll say it again, since you are skirting it over and over:

And then it is up to who to decided what shape passes or fails?

Since this is digital and everything, wouldn't a real study have more objective results, like say the % packets that fail to transmit, after error correction is applied?

A picture, in this case, is only worth a thousand word of obfuscation.

[hdood]

But they aren't. That's not to say that no one has even SEEN a difference, but if the info got there in a different way from one cable to the next, it's NOT the same, is it?

They are the same. As long as the noise level stays below a certain treshold (which it does in all the cables that passed), the signal received is identical to the one sent. It doesn't matter that the waveform on the oscilloscope look slightly different as all the receiving end cares about is whether the voltage falls within the region defined as 0 or the region defined as 1. There is no "getting there in a different way".

The error correction information makes it so. We've already had this conservation. If cable quality made a real difference in digital communication, the internet wouldn't work. Files would end up different on one system to the next.

There is no error correction. Not that it makes any difference to the discussion.

[shakey_snake]

There is no error correction.

All digital protocols use some form of error correction.

[Coldgunner]

All digital protocols use some form of error correction.

Indeed, and there also seems to be a misconception that the error correction fills in the blanks, whereas in facts it requests the data again from the source.

[hdood]

All digital protocols use some form of error correction.

No. I have no idea where you get that idea from. The nature of what is being transmitted dictates possible needs for error correction. In networking, correction and retransmission is important. For a television picture, not so much.

The individual bits sent over an HDMI cable are reordered in an optimal manner that together with the physical design of the cables reduces the likelihood of errors, but there is no actual error correction.

[shakey_snake]

Indeed, and there also seems to be a misconception that the error correction fills in the blanks, whereas in facts it requests the data again from the source.

Nonsense. Error correction is a mathematical process that uses any number of schemes.

No. I have no idea where you get that idea from.

http://www.hdmi.org/download/HDMI_Spec_1.3_GM1.pdf

5.2.3:

During the Data Island, each of the three TMDS channels transmits a series of 10-bit characters

encoded from a 4-bit input word, using TMDS Error Reduction Coding (TERC4). TERC4

significantly reduces the error rate on the link by choosing only 10-bit codes with high inherent

error avoidance.

...

All data within a Data Island is contained within 32 clock Packets. Packets consist of a Packet

Header, a Packet Body (consisting of four Subpackets), and associated error correction bits.

Each Subpacket includes 56 bits of data and is protected by an additional 8 bits of BCH ECC

parity bits.

...

To improve the reliability of the data and to improve the detection of bad data, Error Correction

Code (ECC) parity is added to each packet. BCH(64,56) and BCH(32,24) are generated by the

polynomial G(x) shown in Figure 5-5.

5.4.4

During video data, where each 10-bit character represents 8 bits of pixel data, the encoded

characters provide an approximate DC balance as well as a reduction in the number of transitions

in the data stream. The encode process for the active data period can be viewed in two stages.

The first stage produces a transition-minimized 9-bit code word from the input 8 bits. The second

stage produces a 10-bit code word, the finished TMDS character, which will manage the overall

DC balance of the transmitted stream of characters.

[Coldgunner]

Nonsense. Error correction is a mathematical process that uses any number of schemes.

I guess it can be either/or then, depending on the type of data. A TV signal can simply have the bits filled in to allow it to be displayed, but a re-transmission is needed for a download.

[hdood]

5.2.3:

This does not talk about the video signal, which is what we are discussing here. What it is talking about only applies to the low-bitrate data and sound. It's an easy mistake to make.

5.4.4

Is what I described in my second paragraph. This is not error correction.

I guess it can be either/or then, depending on the type of data. A TV signal can simply have the bits filled in to allow it to be displayed, but a re-transmission is needed for a download.

They aren't even filled in. The data sent over the different HDMI channels specify parts (with RGB, the red, green and blue value) of individual pixels (of which there are many on a full picture). Any errors present in one are simply not considered important enough to warrant the added complexity that error correction (and retransmission) would introduce in such a timing-sensitive high-bitrate signal.

[dwhall]

Tiz why I refuse to do business with Best Buy/Geek Squad. They try pushing this crap on people without realising that once in a while, the person they are trying to B.S. actually knows they are being had. I bought a vista laptop from them awhile back and told the geek squad guy that they pushed on me that I was going to put linux on it. He basically in not so many words, told me that I was a moron for even trying. He told me that some of the hardware in the laptop would only work with Vista. Little did the idiot realise that I had already done my research on the laptop and knew what I was encountering. Then he tried to push some 200.00 service on me to enhance the laptop. Even as I was handing him my credit card, he was trying to convince me that the laptop wasn't capable of running linux. If I wasn't getting such a good deal on it I would have just left.