I recently bought a 2m (6'+) HDMI Monster 400 cable off Ebay from Accessories4less for $69.99. This cable has a street value of $119.99. Great service and free delivery. Received cable in 3 days.
$100 for an HDMI cable?
- Thread starter Briguy
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 50
- Views 6K
Briguy said:
From how you are describing your setup I would say that the RCA copnnection from the 622 to your Yamaha would work for your audio. better yet, if your Yamaha has an optical port you could use that for your 622 audio setup. That would get the dolby 5.1 surround sound to your receiver.
Hope this helps!
Ken
Does your Yamaha have any digital inputs, either coax or optical/toslink? If so, then those will produce a higher quality sound. And if it has Dolby Digital capabilities, then you can have true surround sound.
If it has only coax digital, there are convertors that could convert the 622's optical output to coax digital.
But if no digital connections and if it is a stereo-only receiver, then yes, you would run the RCA cables from the 622 audio outputs to your Yamaha.
If it has only coax digital, there are convertors that could convert the 622's optical output to coax digital.
But if no digital connections and if it is a stereo-only receiver, then yes, you would run the RCA cables from the 622 audio outputs to your Yamaha.
Everyone is posting cheap HDMI prices and address, but nobody is stating why the cheap cables work!
HDMI and DVI are DIGITAL connections. They either work, or do not work. 24K Gold Plated connections, 99.99999% copper starnds, oxygen free, "directional" cables do not make a "hill of beans" difference when it comes to digital.
Now the HDMI cable has to meet the specificaltions for HDMI (two dixi cups and a waxed string will not work!), but after that, there is no difference, as long as the cable works.
Sure there are quality issues, cheap connectors vs well made connectors, quality of construction, and, or course, better cables made cables may cost more than cheaply made cables.
But, if a 5 dollar HDMI cable is working, you will NOT see any difference by using a 100 dollar hdmi cable, as long as they both work. It is all ZERO's and ONE's, the data either gets transfered, or it does not.
There is no "veil of clarity" that is removed when using more expensive hdmi cables.
I was in BB a few months ago, and the cheapest HDMI cable they had was 100 dollars. What a rip off. BUT, I guess they figured, that, if they CAN sell it for a hundred bucks, why not?
AND, it is such an easy sell, to a person who just spent 3000-6000 (or more!) on a Flat Screen or DLP Monitor/AV Receiver/DVD/ setup too! "HEY, you just made a HUGE investment, make sure you get the MAXIMUM clarity by using a GREAT cable!
ANALOG cables are a different story, there is a difference when using cheap vs high quality cables, but there are sensible upgrades, and being stupid! I bought some 10 guage Belden Speaker Cables at .29 cents a foot when I purchased my Axiom Speaker system. That might have been a tad overkill, 12 guage might have worked just as well.
BUT, spending 2-3 dollars a FOOT for speaker cable is just rediculious.
I think this all started years ago, when someone compared something like 20 guage aluminum speaker wire to 12 guage lamp copper lamp cord, and noticed a big difference.
HDMI and DVI are DIGITAL connections. They either work, or do not work. 24K Gold Plated connections, 99.99999% copper starnds, oxygen free, "directional" cables do not make a "hill of beans" difference when it comes to digital.
Now the HDMI cable has to meet the specificaltions for HDMI (two dixi cups and a waxed string will not work!), but after that, there is no difference, as long as the cable works.
Sure there are quality issues, cheap connectors vs well made connectors, quality of construction, and, or course, better cables made cables may cost more than cheaply made cables.
But, if a 5 dollar HDMI cable is working, you will NOT see any difference by using a 100 dollar hdmi cable, as long as they both work. It is all ZERO's and ONE's, the data either gets transfered, or it does not.
There is no "veil of clarity" that is removed when using more expensive hdmi cables.
I was in BB a few months ago, and the cheapest HDMI cable they had was 100 dollars. What a rip off. BUT, I guess they figured, that, if they CAN sell it for a hundred bucks, why not?
AND, it is such an easy sell, to a person who just spent 3000-6000 (or more!) on a Flat Screen or DLP Monitor/AV Receiver/DVD/ setup too! "HEY, you just made a HUGE investment, make sure you get the MAXIMUM clarity by using a GREAT cable!
ANALOG cables are a different story, there is a difference when using cheap vs high quality cables, but there are sensible upgrades, and being stupid! I bought some 10 guage Belden Speaker Cables at .29 cents a foot when I purchased my Axiom Speaker system. That might have been a tad overkill, 12 guage might have worked just as well.
BUT, spending 2-3 dollars a FOOT for speaker cable is just rediculious.
I think this all started years ago, when someone compared something like 20 guage aluminum speaker wire to 12 guage lamp copper lamp cord, and noticed a big difference.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10229&style=
Try here
Bingo! Sounds like a winner. Buy an optical/TOSlink cable and hook er up. Then sit back and enjoy the best sound your 622 can put out.Briguy said:
Try here
Last edited:
By the way, thanks for the info on monoprice. I paid over $100 for the DVI cable for my 921 a year or so ago. When I upgraded to the 622, I got a 10-foot HDMI cable for a total of $10 from monoprice and got it within a week. Works great!
BuddTX said:
Not exactly true. This would be true if the HDMI signal was like a satellite signal and had error correction in the signal and lost bits could be reconstructed. Bits lost in HDMI are lost for good and will result in errors. You can end up with parts of the data not transferred and no way for the TV to know the data was missing. This could lead to wrong colors or missing pixels.
It is as you say "all ZERO's and ONE's, the data either gets transfered, or it does not.", you just have no way of knowing what parts of the data got transferred and which parts did not...
True, but any properly constructed HDMI cable should have essentially no data loss. It is possible to get a $5 HDMI cable that isn't made right and will have data loss. But the vast majority of the cables on the market should work perfectly. For the most part, if you are getting an image on your screen and it doesn't have "sparklies" then it is working fine.
BTW, if anyone wants a HDMI cable that is way over-spec'ed for what is needed, then you can go up to the heavy duty monoprice cable:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...cs_id=1024002&p_id=2283&seq=1&format=2&style=
This one has thicker wires, filter magnets, and thicker gold plating on the connectors. I had a chance to compare one to a $100+ Monster HDMI cable and the heavy duty monoprice looked like the better cable. It sells for $14. That gives you an idea of the profit margin on the more expensive cables.
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...cs_id=1024002&p_id=2283&seq=1&format=2&style=
This one has thicker wires, filter magnets, and thicker gold plating on the connectors. I had a chance to compare one to a $100+ Monster HDMI cable and the heavy duty monoprice looked like the better cable. It sells for $14. That gives you an idea of the profit margin on the more expensive cables.
Here's an example of profiteering in HD cables: The EXACT SAME Philips HD cables cost less than half as much at Sam's Club as they do at Wal-Mart, and they probably come from the same factory and same warehouse:
Even the Wal-Mart prices are a lot cheaper than the equivalent products at Best Buy; their cheapest HDMI/DVI cable is a 4' Monster for $99.99, and their HDMI/DVI adapters are almost as much as Wal-Mart's cable.
- 6' DVI cable (PXT1190): $12.63 vs. $27.46
- 6' HDMI/DVI cable (PXT1196): $19.87 vs. $43.84
Even the Wal-Mart prices are a lot cheaper than the equivalent products at Best Buy; their cheapest HDMI/DVI cable is a 4' Monster for $99.99, and their HDMI/DVI adapters are almost as much as Wal-Mart's cable.
Digital is Digital. I agree.
Mike,
If there were lost bits, then HDCP would not work. I've had this arguement with many people, and it all comes back to HDCP. I've had a bad DVI cable before, you get snow.
If your losing video/audio data then your also losing the encryption keys and would get interupted video.
I think its safe to say, it either works, or it does not.
I bought one of those $125 HDMI cables from BB because I couldn't wait to play with my new toy. 3 days later my $14 HDMI cable from Parts Express showed up, zero difference in PQ and I took the other cable back to BB.
I'm still running my 622 via component. I have a HDMI switch on my Yamaha, one is for my DVD-C950 and I'm saving the other for HD DVD.
Mike,
If there were lost bits, then HDCP would not work. I've had this arguement with many people, and it all comes back to HDCP. I've had a bad DVI cable before, you get snow.
If your losing video/audio data then your also losing the encryption keys and would get interupted video.
I think its safe to say, it either works, or it does not.
I bought one of those $125 HDMI cables from BB because I couldn't wait to play with my new toy. 3 days later my $14 HDMI cable from Parts Express showed up, zero difference in PQ and I took the other cable back to BB.
I'm still running my 622 via component. I have a HDMI switch on my Yamaha, one is for my DVD-C950 and I'm saving the other for HD DVD.
Let me add another question into the foray. I have an input on my TV for an HDMI however the cord I'm utilizing is HDMI to DVI cord. There then is a DVI to HDMI adaptor connected. Is it better to have an HDMI to HDMI cord rather than have to use this adaptor? Common sense says that the more connections that is made the more likely something is connected right away. Regardless I think I'll like it without the adaptor just to cut down on the bulk behind the TV.
Max Wright said:
Well, the connector is generally the weak point of any cable system. A connector relies on metal to metal contact and conduction. Therefore any contact has the potential for oxidation or dirt buildup. Dirt buildup occurs when the cable is connected and disconnected. The oxidation will build up over time, especially in the case of dissimilar metal contacts. This is why cable manufactures will promote gold plated contacts. Gold is a relatively non-reactive metal and thus more resistant to oxidation. While metals are good conductors, metal oxides tend to be insulators. However, gold is a soft metal and will eventually wear away if the connector is disconnected regularly.
All that said, it probably won't make much of a practical difference on your setup. I would be more worried about that DVI-DVI link adding stress to the HDMI connector over time. I have a spot where I have something similar and invested some time in adding stress relief. That can be as simple as blocking the connector up with something to relieve the downward stress.
Last edited:
Doesn't the HDMI connection also carry sound to the TV? If so, make the change to HDMI to HDMI and you could eleminate the RCA sound cables.
You could eliminate them if you are using your TV's built-in speakers.
Ick!
I don't even know if the speakers in my HDTV work, I've never connected them, even for a test.
Ick!
I don't even know if the speakers in my HDTV work, I've never connected them, even for a test.
My Hitachi has an input port where I can use it's speakers as the Center Speaker for my stereo's 5.1 surroundTom Bombadil said:
jayn_j said:
Thank you for the response jayn_j. That is one thing that I was worrying about too, just the added stress and the weight of having an adaptor pulling on a port behind the television.
Derwin0 said:My Hitachi has an input port where I can use it's speakers as the Center Speaker for my stereo's 5.1 surround
That smiley may mean you are being sarcastic, but just in case anyone out there is doing this, I'll go around and throw in my 2 cents on this practice...
Unless you have a really low end 5.1 speaker system, you don't want to do this.
The most important channel in a 5.1 system is the center channel, more sound is directed to that channel than any of the rest.
And it would also result in your center speaker having a much different sound than your front L & R speakers, which is also a very bad thing in a 5.1 system. When sounds pan across the front, which is a frequent event, they will change a lot as they go through the center (if it is a TV speaker).
If your front left and right speakers are on the order of $50 small satellite speakers, then it won't matter a lot. Otherwise, you would be much better off using a matched center channel.
