Some of the longer cables I have seen are close to $200 each! I am all about quality and "getting what you pay for". My concern is that with cables there may not actually be any advantage in spending the extra cash.
2007-10-03 11:12:08 · 5 answers · asked by davidgherron 1 in Consumer Electronics ➔ Home Theater
PCWorld or PCMagazine (I can't remember which) did an experiment a few months ago to determine if expensive HDMI cables were worth the money. Under various conditions, they measured signal quality using sophisticated equipment and found the higher priced cables generally had better readings, but the results weren't significant. Then, they checked to see if a panel of viewers could tell which cable(s) provided a better picture. They found no difference. The bottom line is the higher priced cables may make you feel better about your system, but they won't improve your picture quality to the point that you'd notice.
When I bought my HDTV a year ago, I didn't want to pay $80 to $150 for an HDMI cable, so I bought one for $25, and my picture quality is great. I bought another cable for $2.12 (plus $5 for shipping) a month ago through StarTech (I think) for a friend of mine, and his picture quality is great, too. Think about it... If you can buy computer circuit boards (like an Ethernet board) for under $10, why wouldn't you expect to be able to buy wires for under $5? As long as you buy from a reputable company, you should have no problem.
2007-10-03 12:00:34 · answer #1 · answered by Jim P 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Over spending for a cable is a common concern. But quality is going to vary by cable, equipment, and application.
If you have ever heard Flapjack say to use his 10% rule to start, he's right. Next you need to try out the better cables and see if you can tell the difference and if you want to pay for what you see. There is no tell all for cable performance.
The only problem I see, is with that long a distance ( which component would have no problem with) you may need a fiber optic link. Try SEVERAL cables out to get the best match.
2007-10-04 07:58:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
brand doesn't make a difference with any type of cable. The makeup of the cable is the biggest thing that can make a difference--anything gold plated will last a while because gold does not corrode don't believe any of that monster cable packaging-it may say that it is oxygen free twisted pair, but in reality all cables of the same type (hdmi, coax, etc.) are made the same way. with the more expensive cables you are really just paying for them to look in a thesaurus and/or come up with some really fancy words for "copper wire covered in insulation"
25 foot long is not that long of a run. go with the no-name cables and save your money for a decent vacation
hdmi, rca's, component cables, and digital audio cables all use copper conductors, regardless of brand, the major difference is the quality of the rca ends. hdmi ends are all relatively the same
the only oddballs are optical cables but they all use a clear fiber to carry light--and because they carry light, which is non conductive, they do not need to be gold plated, because gold plating is used for electrical conductivity.
here is website i found a while ago with decently priced cables, even after you factor in shipping costs.
http://www.monoprice.com/home/index.asp
2007-10-03 13:31:12 · answer #3 · answered by Ryan 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Brand shouldn't matter. HDMI is a digital signal thus the cable makes less of a difference. Analog signals are much more sensitive to the wire quality and shielding.
2007-10-03 11:28:43 · answer #4 · answered by JMan 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
For better performance try to relocate equipment so you can get by with a 6 ft. cable, then go with the least expensive.
2007-10-04 10:33:51 · answer #5 · answered by jimmymae2000 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋