What Hi-Fi Awards 2009: Cable - Chord Company HDMI SuperShield

[jewzii1]

i agree.. 50 pound's DAMN haha.. a normal HDMI is like 15 pound's.. and it is still the same

[anarchosolar]

Its ALL bullshit. There is NO difference between HDMI cables it is NOT analogue

there is NO signal to noise it is just ones and zeros. GET A LIFE !!

[Milan53]

By the way this makes WhatHiFi in general very unbelievable.

[Milan53]

HDMI cables do not make a difference. The digital HDMI signal is being error-detected and error-corrected (by parity). If there is a loss of signal, the receiver can simply fix this. As long as the HDMI cable has a big enough bandwidth (and they all do, because it's part of the HDMI standard), there can theoretically be no difference in quality.

Look at this digital YouTube vid. Whichever ethernet cable you use, as long as the bandwidth is big enough, the quality will always be the same.

[111olbap]

@Milan53 Common misconception bro. Go look at the figure 8 pattern tests for various quality HDMI cables.

[Milan53]

@111olbap pointless, as I would know which cable I'm looking at. Same for the testers of WhatHifi. More expensive cables always look better in a non-double blind test. The only way to test this properly is to watch on the same gear, only switching the cable, and double blind.

[neagualex]

another snake oil cable from Chord Company.........

[bingsarac9]

entry level at £50! these people are off their heads - I got a solidly constructed HMDI cable off Amazon for £0.59 which works brilliantly, which had many user reviews where people had been talked into buying Chord, Russ Andrews and QED cables costing £50+ which had absolutely no difference in performance on their tvs.

[mamifero76]

pure snake oil, the $5 hdmi cable will produce exactly the same image quality than a $100-300 fancy cable.

[mattnew33]

do you literally know nothing? if knew anything remotely mathematic, you would understand how much is lost on standard cables E.G. PSO...its $5 for a reason!! because the components are poorly manufactured!

[mamifero76]

Professional filmaker, audio engineer and audiophile tells you anything?

As long the cable is well built there are no problems.

Analog cables are a different story, but digital short run cables are all the same.

Run some tests and if you see any difference it might be the placebo effect that hits people who spent few hundreds on a  cable. If you did spend few hundreds on it, might be better not to run any tests, just live happy and enjoy your cables that produce a "better image quality"

[veyronman]

@mamifero76 Not true.

For example, a cable suitable for HDMI 1.3 is not going to be able to handle the same functions as a cable that is suitable for HDMI 1.4

[mamifero76]

1. Maybe in the next 5 years you might need a 1.4 HDMI Cable, however right now there is nothing out there that would require a 1.4

2. Even the most basic HDMI 1.2 will work with your current HD TV and Blu Ray Player.

3. HDMI 1.3a will transfer32 Bits, Deep Color and much more with ease.

4. The HDMI 1.4 cost $ 5 as well

5. Dont beleive everything is on TV or Magazines

Good Luck

[veyronman]

@mamifero76 Panasonic, Samsung, LG and Sony all have internet-capable TVs on the market that currently, with HDMI 1.3, require a separate ethernet cable to enable users to access the web and use the extra features.

HDMI 1.4 has the bandwidth capabilities to enable an ethernet signal to be carried simultaneously with sound and picture signals - ethernet is necessary for current internet-capable TVs, of which there are examples from at least four major players

5 years - hah you're a tool

[mamifero76]

you dont even know the current bandwith of the 1.3.c.

enough to pass hd signal along with anything else u want to put on it.