So what do we think? Seems quite compelling.
AMP Pioneer VS-LX70 SPEAKERS Kef iQ50/iQ60C/2 x 2005.3 rear speakers SCREEN Panasonic TX-P50VT30 50" Plasma NAS Synology DS211J MEDIA Popcorn Hour NMT A300 - Self-built PC - Cambridge Audio NP30 HEADPHONE Sennheiser HD 25 Originals/PC 363D Other Solwise Homeplug Gigabyte Network - Netgear 8-port Gigabyte Ethernet Switch
Interesting read, thanks.
HiFi / A/V / Bedroom
As usual, it's all about the picture....HDMI carry sound as well!
"Everything has been said before, but since nobody listens we have to keep going back and beginning all over again." André Gide
Then there are also....
Internet - laptop - DAC - amp - lots of headphones.
"A music lover will stop what he's doing and stay glued to a favorite piece of music even if it's coming over a 3" speaker or a public-address system..." - Ken Rockwell
Thanks for the link SouthaK, it's an interesting read. There's already loads of proof that digital cables make no difference so surely this is just another nail in the coffin of expensive digital cables.
I like the line "James Randi has even extended his $1 million prize for anyone that can prove paranormal activity to include anyone that can prove that expensive HDMI cables make a difference."
Any takers for $1,000,000?
No? I thought not.
PC > AVI Neutron Five 2.1
Sony NWZ-A847 64GB Walkman > Westone UM3x
But I thought that expensive HDMI cables are supposed to be able to make blacks darker, colours more viberant and skin tones look more natural etc?
I am happy with the two 1m QED HDMI cables that cost £70 each (when new) and I got for £3.55 each last year due to a pricing packaging error by Tesco and/or QED
(I only bought them for their length - to replace 2m cables - and their price).
So I am immune to any pro or anti expensive HDMI arguments.
Marantz M-CR603 + AirPlay • Rega R3 loudspeakers • iPhone 5 • iMac • Apple Airport Extreme 802.11n • Apple iPad Mini • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390 • Ruark Audio R1 Deluxe • Humax HDR-Fox T2
But I thought that expensive HDMI cables can make blacks darker, colours more viberant and skin tones look more natural etc?
My point is that if you are testing something, there is no point in concentrating on half of what it does. It would be like testing a car for the room it has inside and forgetting about everything else.
I still would probably choose Atlas Hyper over some generic job. but only because for the look of it (I use Hyper range throughout do for the sake of aesthetic consistency I'd go for that one). I wouldn't kid myself into thinking that it makes something better/ different than any other 1,5m HDMI cable.
now, we can argue if aesthetic considerations are worth 70GBP premium over generic cable. but that a question no blind ABX tests nor HD5 hash captures will never answer...
Giro, InTheGroove, Digit, ClassicOne, MG12
But HDMI cables don't make any audible difference to the sound either.
That's a nice pot of gold for someone
Formerly known as Ooh, Boots, etc etc...
Laptop... HTC One X....ATV3....ADM9Ts...Two German Shorthaired Pointers...
(I wouldn't bet my life either way, as the jury is still out...but I suspect there is more difference to the sound than the picture).
I thought it was very interesting too, especially the bit about people perceiving small differences when even no changes have been made. It's an effect that audio dealers have been exploiting for years - they sit there tapping their feet and fingers and in that situation it is the hardest thing in the world to say "I don't hear any difference" and even harder NOT to hear a differnce even if there isn't one...you almost make yourself hear a difference!
It's a statement that has been scientifically proven to be true.
If a HDMI cable can make a difference to the sound why hasn't anyone claimed the $1,000,000 prize from James Randi yet?
What jury would that be, Cno
© 2013 Haymarket Publishing