Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Current Events' started by pukifloyd, Dec 8, 2009.
Yes you heard it right...$1000 for the cable...
Who will buy one??
original article here
i already ordered like 10 of those
lol i can get an hdmi at bestbuy for $40
Watch out Monster Cable...Wireworld just upped the ante!
considering we are willing to pay $25 for a 1.5m USB cable means we can start buying cabling in the thousands of dollars.
If you're paying $40 for an HDMI cable, you're being screwed bigtime.
http://www.monoprice.com No reason to buy cables anywhere else.
And I thought my faith in humanity was on the increase....
so.....is it like $150 bucks per inch or yard?
Reminds me of the set of 12 inch patch cables (from pre-Amp to Amp) that I saw in Akihabara a few years ago that cost around $13,000.
Guess they sounded better than the typical ones that cost about $10-20.
I rigged up an old VCR I found at the Salvation Army with one of these, and played back some VHS movies I picked up at the flea market, and now they look better than HD!
I've been running some old 16mm stuff through the AUX input on my upconverting DVD player and they're coming through in 4K!
Or off ebay for £2.
and they work. Perfectly.
Ironic as hell that someone would do that, plug it into a blu-ray player that's got a cheap membrane wire connecting the laser to the board, and probably a relatively cheap connector for the HDMI port. XD
Oh yeah, and the thin mass-produced PCBs? The possibility of lost pixels?
Heaven forbid someone plugs that into their digital cable box.. or worse! Satellite TV.. LMFAO. Lost pixels? Man.
I can beat that.
I've got that beaten.
Wireworld also sell a simple RCA phono jack cable, (available at the local market for 50p) for no less than £2300 for a single meter. That's $3750 in american dollars.
What's even worse is it won 'Editor's Choice' from a UK hi-fi magazine.
Magazine website: http://www.hifinews.co.uk
On behalf of the entire UK nation, I humbly apologise for this horrible scam. The stench of bullshît from this magazine is overpowering.
hasnt it been proven in a test that high cost premium cables actually hold no advantages over the cheap no name ones?
coulda sworn i've read that somewhere
What hifi mag covered it done a test with 20 odd cables. No picture/sound difference upto 10 meters. Over that they didn't test.
hmmmm thought so,
i've only got a cheap £5 cable for me ps3 > HD tele and my best friends step dad spent hundreds on the cables and i couldnt tell any difference at all lol,
There was a test done awhile back where no one could tell the difference between Monster Cable and a coat hanger:
Well, let's put it this way. HDMI and DVI are pretty much the same format (as evidenced by the fact that you can easily convert one to the other).
Before HDMI cables, did we worry about buying high-quality, brand-name DVI cables to connect to our monitors? Were there comparisons of which ones gave a sharper picture? No, of course not: you simply walked into the computer store and asked for a DVI cable.
Same with network cable, you don't ask or care what brand, you just buy one, and if it doesn't work, you replace it with one that does. You don't worry about which brand of network cabling results in more accurate transmission rates.
Now, in reality, it's true that you do get what you pay for, and a higher quality cable will, in all likelihood, result in a "more accurate" signal transfer with less interference. And we're used to the traditional world of analog signals where "more accurate signal reproduction" translates directly into "better sound or picture". But of course in the digital world, all you need is "good enough" -- either the data all gets there, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, you'll know it right away.
So as long as the cable is good enough to get you to that "good enough" point, you're fine. Now, try to run a cheap cable over really long distances, for example, and you might find that it degrades the signal too much so it is no longer hitting that "good enough" threshold, but again, you'll know it right away, because you won't see anything at all -- you won't be sitting there wondering if your picture is suffering a tiny bit because of it. You won't get fuzziness, or ghosting, or muddy sound, or crackling, or any of the things we used to associate with crappy cables. It either works, or it doesn't.
Go ahead and buy the cheapest HDMI cable you can find that works in your setup. If it doesn't work because of an extreme case in your setup (long distance, perhaps lots of switching equipment in between) then go up a level, spend a bit more, try a different brand, until you find one that does.
Look at my post above.
Yep, that's the great thing about digital. You either get all or nothing. There's no grey area. The cheapest cable that gets you all is what you need, and there would be no visible difference in picture between a $4 HDMI cable and the $1,000 HDMI cable. It's not like analog where lower quality cable could result in snow or static. Even then, I'd rather deal with a slightly degraded picture quality than spend that kind of money on a cable.
Heck, you don't even necessarily need all the bits to get there, thanks to error correction.
Made especially for people who care more about the gear than the music.
Ah but do you have a webpage and a review for it?
There are significant differences between Cat4, Cat5, Cat5e, Cat 6, and cat 6a network cable.
Short summary here:
Some will work with modern gigabit ethernet, some won't. Some will last longer in vibrating environments (in cars etc) others will fail quicker.
I've gone through offices chucking out any cable that was rated less than Cat5e (it was pretty old as well.).
Of course, these are clearly defined electrical standards, not nebulous marketing speak. The higher cat cables do cost a bit more, but we're talking £30 for 100m of cat5 and £35 for 100m of cat6. Not exactly bank-breaking.
There's also issues like standard of fire-resistance, which is important in the office / public spaces, plus many other tedious details.
But the important thing is these are electrical and physical ratings according to independent standards.
Brands also matter, apparently. According to the Cat5 page
there is a significant problem with Chinese brands of Cat5 cable not being real Cat5 cable. I don't know if that's true or not.
I do know that when I want some cat5e, I'm much more likely to trust a reel of Belkin than some no-name brand with 'Excellent Cat5' written in felt tip on what looks like telephone wiring.
one thing i wonder...what kind of people do they target? what do they think while making this cable?
i think they'll only sell 10-15cables a month (correct me if i am wrong..)...then why just make it?!
$1000 is a lot of money! we can buy a decent tv with blue ray player in that price!
Stupidest crap I have ever seen in my life. Anyone who is thick enough to buy this deserves to be ripped off.
HDMI is DIGITAL! Either the signal arrives or it doesn't. This is nothing like analogue where gold plated connectors and such could actually help picture quality. If you think you are seeing any improved picture quality with this cable, then it is merely your mind convincing you so you don't feel ripped off. This cable will deliver exactly the same picture quality as a $2 HDMI cable. Morons.
Why make it? To sell 10-15 cables (or whatever) a month? - Sounds like a decent business to me.
I think digital signals tend to behave in quite an analogue manner when 'the signal doesn't arrive'. Sparkles from poorly manufactured cables and long runs are pretty common - there's all sorts of silly technical posts on why hdmi/etc isn't really the best way of transmitting a/v. Obviously it works pretty well for most people, but us consumers still need something else to buy into in the future
You're right about the $2 cable being able to match the performance though.