Concerns About HDMI Cable "Quality" and a Speaker Wire Question...

[j_garcia]

Just buy them at Bluejeans and you won't have a single thing to worry about. I've bought at least 15 from them so far and zero issues. If you want an in depth read on what matters with HDMI: http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/hdmi-cable-information.htm?hdmidept

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Thanks.

I actually have HDMI cables in my system -- one Monster "speed rated" variant going from the BD player to my receiver and then another very heavy-gauge shielded "garden variety" type my last installer sold me going from the receiver to the TV -- but I wanted to know if I was somehow "missing out" on any resolution or information with the cables I am presently running.

BTW, How do you like your Marantz integrated? Do you use it for 2-channel listening?

 

[TLS Guy]

Thanks.

I actually have HDMI cables in my system -- one Monster "speed rated" variant going from the BD player to my receiver and then another very heavy-gauge shielded "garden variety" type my last installer sold me going from the receiver to the TV -- but I wanted to know if I was somehow "missing out" on any resolution or information with the cables I am presently running.

BTW, How do you like your Marantz integrated? Do you use it for 2-channel listening?

You miss nothing. A digital connection works or it does not, nothing in between.

In other words if the error rate, and there always is, beats the error correction, you have nothing.

 

[j_garcia]

I actually have HDMI cables in my system -- one Monster "speed rated" variant going from the BD player to my receiver and then another very heavy-gauge shielded "garden variety" type my last installer sold me going from the receiver to the TV -- but I wanted to know if I was somehow "missing out" on any resolution or information with the cables I am presently running.

The only thing you are missing out on is what it cost for the Monster cable name. I have read two comparisons (CNET and a gaming magazine) now that have directly compared Monster's $150 HDMI to a $5 Monoprice and found no difference between them in terms of performance for under 10ft. I believe it said that there could be factors when you get above 30ft that might make a difference. Which means, based on those comparisons and the dozens of people on here who are telling you the same thing, you may rest assured that you aren't going to see anything different with different HDMI cables.

BTW, How do you like your Marantz integrated? Do you use it for 2-channel listening?

I am very happy with it. I had a PM7000 prior to it and was happy with that one as well. They are pretty stout and sound great. I bought it for the bedroom but I am using it in a second system at my other house now.

 

[Skwisgaar]

Thanks.

I actually have HDMI cables in my system -- one Monster "speed rated"

The "speed rated" should be a hint that Monster is ripping you off. There is an overall data rate specification for the cable, which translates into a maximum resolution and color bit depth. Some hdmi cables brag about being specced over 1080p, which just doesn't matter.

 

[Skwisgaar]

Cables likely have the LEAST affect on your system of anything in the system, especially when it comes to HDMI.

Upgrading to low end Monster Cables for multimedia had a big benefit back when I was a poor college student. But nowadays I and everyone else are either using pro audio or home theater systems with their computer, and there are much more cost effective choices.

 

[j_garcia]

Upgrading to low end Monster Cables for multimedia had a big benefit back when I was a poor college student. But nowadays I and everyone else are either using pro audio or home theater systems with their computer, and there are much more cost effective choices.

Even though there were fewer choices back in the day, there were always choices. I think we've all had big Monster cable at one point.

 

[studiorat_1967]

Hi everyone - I work at BJC, and thought I'd chime in a little bit on this...

One of the big issues that isn't mentioned is that not all HDMI output and receiving circuits are created equal. During our testing of the BJC Series-1 cable, we found that one set up would work perfectly at 50 feet (1080p), and then we'd change only the output device and find that no "handshake" was happening. I take phone calls all the time from people running into this issue (changing one device, and then nothing works). Some units are notorious for having weak outputs - many of them are cable & satellite boxes. Less than 1% of the cables returned to us as "bad" are actually faulty. Many times, boosters, or shortening the run is the only fix.

To be honest, we have many customers running 1080p at 100' (our longest HDMI cable). While this will not work with 100% of the gear out there, chances are it'll be fine on most of it.

One note on the whole Cat1 & Cat 2 HDMI certification - bear in mind that those numbers don't really mean a whole lot when it comes to performance. There's no way in hell that a 100' HDMI cable will pass even the Cat 1 eye pattern test, but it still functions well on most devices. As far as the new 3D HDTV units on the market - many think that they'll need a new cable. This is false - but don't just listen to me... there are several other independent articles that cover this:

blogs.consumerreports.org/electronics/2010/03/3d-tv-hdmi-41-cables-sales-not-necessary-regular-basic-hdmi-tv-bluray-player.html

consumerist.com/2010/03/sorry-monster-you-dont-need-hdmi-14-cables-for-3d-tv.html

Also - beware of any seller calling their HDMI cables "v1.4". This is in direct violation of the licensing agreement with the HDMI licensing organization.

Cheers!

 

[Skwisgaar]

If you are running a 100' cable I think you really need to use an active HDMI cable.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

The only thing you are missing out on is what it cost for the Monster cable name. I have read two comparisons (CNET and a gaming magazine) now that have directly compared Monster's $150 HDMI to a $5 Monoprice and found no difference between them in terms of performance for under 10ft. I believe it said that there could be factors when you get above 30ft that might make a difference. Which means, based on those comparisons and the dozens of people on here who are telling you the same thing, you may rest assured that you aren't going to see anything different with different HDMI cables.

Thanks. Was just curious because as I stated, I have one Monster HDMI "1080p rated/certified" cable going from my BD player to the AVR, and then a second feeding video out from the AVR to the display, and this second link is a heavy-duty, extremely insulated "generic" type HDMI cable I purchased from the installer that assisted me with my previous system. They are gold-plated, though...

So, I was wondering if using two differently branded cables in the system would even make a difference -- one going from the source deck to the AVR and the other from the AVR to the display for video passthrough...

I am very happy with it. I had a PM7000 prior to it and was happy with that one as well. They are pretty stout and sound great. I bought it for the bedroom but I am using it in a second system at my other house now.

Interesting; was just curious, as I was considering one of the Marantz integrateds or stereo receivers when I was shopping for one for my 2-channel room -- I ended up, of course, going with the Onkyo 8555 as the Marantzes were a bit out of budget and I really haven't been happy with my CC4001 CD changer which occasionally skips a disc and ignores it like it's not even in the carousel tray...

At any rate, do you use your Marantz for two-channel music playback? Is the PM7000 an integrated as well?

 

[j_garcia]

Interesting; was just curious, as I was considering one of the Marantz integrateds or stereo receivers when I was shopping for one for my 2-channel room -- I ended up, of course, going with the Onkyo 8555 as the Marantzes were a bit out of budget and I really haven't been happy with my CC4001 CD changer which occasionally skips a disc and ignores it like it's not even in the carousel tray...

At any rate, do you use your Marantz for two-channel music playback? Is the PM7000 an integrated as well?

Yes, the PM7000 was the predecessor to the one I have. The 7200 was tested to actually output more than the 95w it is rated at and has the ability to swtich from standard class AB mode to class A opperation. It isn't dedicated to music, but music is the primary use and is the reason why I originally bought the unit. The Onkyos are excellent stereo units as well. Those and the H/K stereo receivers were what I was looking at originally as well, but I got a deal on the Marantz.

I had a CC4000 and it died on me in just a few months. The shop I got it from allowed me to trade it in for a Sony that has worked flawlessly ever since I love their receivers and amps, but Marantz players are not their strongest category traditionally.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Yes, the PM7000 was the predecessor to the one I have. The 7200 was tested to actually output more than the 95w it is rated at and has the ability to swtich from standard class AB mode to class A opperation. It isn't dedicated to music, but music is the primary use and is the reason why I originally bought the unit.

Interesting -- what else do you play through it?

The Onkyos are excellent stereo units as well. Those and the H/K stereo receivers were what I was looking at originally as well, but I got a deal on the Marantz.

I understand, and agree -- probably the best three brands in mid-to-high-fi stereo gear going right now...

I had a CC4000 and it died on me in just a few months. The shop I got it from allowed me to trade it in for a Sony that has worked flawlessly ever since I love their receivers and amps, but Marantz players are not their strongest category traditionally.

I didn't know that Marantz players weren't that strong -- even their single-disc, premium-priced SACD decks? So, you had the predecessor of my 4001; I didn't even know there was one! Where's the Sony changer in your signature list...is it a CD carousel changer? Is it from the ES line? I personally wouldn't buy anything non-ES Sony in terms of audio gear, but that's just me.

 

[j_garcia]

Interesting -- what else do you play through it?

Since it is my other house, I am using it as my primary (only) system there I watch Blu-ray and DVD movies on that rig. Once I move up there, it will become the bedroom system.

I didn't know that Marantz players weren't that strong -- even their single-disc, premium-priced SACD decks? So, you had the predecessor of my 4001; I didn't even know there was one! Where's the Sony changer in your signature list...is it a CD carousel changer? Is it from the ES line? I personally wouldn't buy anything non-ES Sony in terms of audio gear, but that's just me.

Yes, it is a CA70ES changer. I have a Sony SACD carousel also, neither of which are currently installed in the systems due to lack of room in both

I believe many of the Marantz players are built by Philllips, and their quality isn't always top notch, so it isn't so much Marantz fault At one point I believe it was Phillips who owned Marantz prior to D&M Holdings and they still have business links between the two.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Since it is my other house, I am using it as my primary (only) system there I watch Blu-ray and DVD movies on that rig. Once I move up there, it will become the bedroom system.

Oh -- you're in the process of moving? When you watch BDs and DVDs through the Marantz, are you listening to just 2-channel audio, not surround?

Yes, it is a CA70ES changer. I have a Sony SACD carousel also, neither of which are currently installed in the systems due to lack of room in both

I know how that goes, with the space issue...I just the other day took my Numark professional dual CD mixing unit out of storage and connected it to my rack system; it's been in the closet since we moved into the new house.

I simply don't like any of Sony's non-ES audio gear; I think they do video better. Although an audio enthusiast/phile friend of mine had a Sony cassette deck that made tapes like I've never heard before -- perhaps not since the likes of Nakamichi had I heard a tape deck make recordings like this. Awesome unit.

I believe many of the Marantz players are built by Philllips, and their quality isn't always top notch, so it isn't so much Marantz fault At one point I believe it was Phillips who owned Marantz prior to D&M Holdings and they still have business links between the two.

Interesting...if I could do it over again, I'd probably not get the CC4001 and instead would have opted for Onkyo's changer, which looks really cool with the company's signature blue/green light that illuminates the disc trays...

Did Phillips have their hands in Denon doings, as well, or was it only Marantz?

 

[j_garcia]

Oh -- you're in the process of moving? When you watch BDs and DVDs through the Marantz, are you listening to just 2-channel audio, not surround?

My primary rig is at the current house and where I do most of my listening. The secondary one is 2ch only; not even a sub. This pic is already a bit old because the Panny is now a BD-65 instead of 60, but everything else is the same (last post on pg2, the CA70ES is in the thread too): http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59010&highlight=system&page=2

I know how that goes, with the space issue...I just the other day took my Numark professional dual CD mixing unit out of storage and connected it to my rack system; it's been in the closet since we moved into the new house.

I simply don't like any of Sony's non-ES audio gear; I think they do video better. Although an audio enthusiast/phile friend of mine had a Sony cassette deck that made tapes like I've never heard before -- perhaps not since the likes of Nakamichi had I heard a tape deck make recordings like this. Awesome unit.

I won't touch most things from them that are non-ES either. Sony's older stuff seems to have been better than what they are putting out these days. There's no PS3 ES though

Did Phillips have their hands in Denon doings, as well, or was it only Marantz?

No, that was pre-D&M holdings, so Denon was not part of the picture at that time.

 

[ParadigmDawg]

Glad you joined up. I just ordered 2 sub cables from you, make sure they get here quickly!!!!

Hi everyone - I work at BJC, and thought I'd chime in a little bit on this...

One of the big issues that isn't mentioned is that not all HDMI output and receiving circuits are created equal. During our testing of the BJC Series-1 cable, we found that one set up would work perfectly at 50 feet (1080p), and then we'd change only the output device and find that no "handshake" was happening. I take phone calls all the time from people running into this issue (changing one device, and then nothing works). Some units are notorious for having weak outputs - many of them are cable & satellite boxes. Less than 1% of the cables returned to us as "bad" are actually faulty. Many times, boosters, or shortening the run is the only fix.

To be honest, we have many customers running 1080p at 100' (our longest HDMI cable). While this will not work with 100% of the gear out there, chances are it'll be fine on most of it.

One note on the whole Cat1 & Cat 2 HDMI certification - bear in mind that those numbers don't really mean a whole lot when it comes to performance. There's no way in hell that a 100' HDMI cable will pass even the Cat 1 eye pattern test, but it still functions well on most devices. As far as the new 3D HDTV units on the market - many think that they'll need a new cable. This is false - but don't just listen to me... there are several other independent articles that cover this:

blogs.consumerreports.org/electronics/2010/03/3d-tv-hdmi-41-cables-sales-not-necessary-regular-basic-hdmi-tv-bluray-player.html

consumerist.com/2010/03/sorry-monster-you-dont-need-hdmi-14-cables-for-3d-tv.html

Also - beware of any seller calling their HDMI cables "v1.4". This is in direct violation of the licensing agreement with the HDMI licensing organization.

Cheers!

 

[PearlcorderS701]

My primary rig is at the current house and where I do most of my listening. The secondary one is 2ch only; not even a sub. This pic is already a bit old because the Panny is now a BD-65 instead of 60, but everything else is the same (last post on pg2, the CA70ES is in the thread too): http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59010&highlight=system&page=2

Actually, everything (from what I can tell) was on the third page -- but thanks for sharing the pics! Yeah, that's a nice ES changer; so, this setup with the Marantz integrated is working as your primary system right now?

I won't touch most things from them that are non-ES either. Sony's older stuff seems to have been better than what they are putting out these days. There's no PS3 ES though

LOL on the PS3 -- but it's weird, even their ES stuff doesn't get reviewed well; surprisingly, in Home Theater mag a few issues back, they did a review of the $2K ES Blu-ray player and it didn't get good marks. Video processing was below par, from what I can remember, and the entire thing, they reported, just wasn't a good value.

Still, like other manufacturers, their stuff was better when it was older -- seems to be the trend.

No, that was pre-D&M holdings, so Denon was not part of the picture at that time.

Gotcha.

 

[j_garcia]

It is the only system I have up there. I am sort of split between the two places, working on that one on weekends and living/working here in the Bay Area during the week mostly, so both system see use.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

It is the only system I have up there. I am sort of split between the two places, working on that one on weekends and living/working here in the Bay Area during the week mostly, so both system see use.

I understand. What part of the Bay Area? Me and the wife are always in San Francisco -- we love that city!

 

[j_garcia]

I am in San Jose, but the bay area is practically one big city