HDMI Cables - worth it?

[Jeff Corey]

Just got a HD TV and I can connect it to my cable box with either the five separate cables provided by the cable company or a HDMI cable for $60. Is it worth it?

[Belz...]

Nope. HDMI cables are worth it if you have an HD tv but regardless of the price, they are basically all the same. They're just wires.

Audiophiles have the same problem with their own cables. Usually, the 250$ cables will perform pretty much the same as 1$ ones, in the sense that human ears/eyes won't be able to tell the difference.

If you're willing to order on the internet you might be able to find those cables for 99 cents or a few dollars. Otherwise I'm sure you can find some for about 8$, somewhere in your area.

ETA: And since your area is New York, I can only assume you have lots of stores there :p

[OnlyTellsTruths]

<snip>, they are basically all the same. They're just wires.<snip>

He's mostly right that a cheap one will be just as good as a pricey one. I say mostly in that: make sure you don't get a shoddy scam cable (a good tip off would be the cord isn't much thicker than a human hair :)).

Something that shoddy wouldn't last long on Amazon, so I would guess you can buy the cheapest set of HDMI cables at Amazon in confidence. Just go to Amazon, search HDMI, select Electronics category, then you can sort by price.... and of course get a new one, you probably don't want used cables (used cables usually come complete with cat/dog/mouse/ferret gnaw holes).

[elgarak]

Well, the five cables is probably component (3 video cables) plus 2 audio cables. Which means the signal they carry is analog, while HDMI signals are digital. Theoretically, could mean interference on the analog 5 cable connection. But, in my experience, that is practically not observable on cable lengths of a few feet from a cable box to a TV.

HDMI is a bit simpler. Just one cable and you're done.

As always, get the cheapest good quality cable you can get. For online ordering, check out monoprice.com. Cheap, but never got junk cables from them.

[paximperium]

Uh Belz, I think Jeff is asking about the YPbPr Analog cable vs HDMI cable.
HDMI is the current industry standard when it comes to HDTV. It will allow your HDTV to talk and exchange information with what you plug it into. The fact that it is digital as well supposedly means that youn't lose any picture quality since your TV doesn't have to convert analog signals.

I believe it is worth it. Just buy the cheapest HDMI cables.

[Belz...]

Yes I misread him on the first try, which is why I amended my post. HDMI is better, but buy the cheapest HDMI you can trust.

[Jeff Corey]

Thanks, all. I figured that the Monster HDMI cables were just as superior as Monster audio cables are to regular cable. That is, not at all.
I am going have to get a HDMI cable sometime soon to avoid having plug and unplug cables to the dvd player when I want to use it.

[Giggywig]

Just make sure you wrap it in paper and ground it with some garden soil.

[WildCat]

They're right, you can just get a cheap cable at Amazon. Where you should be pouring all your money is in a good line conditioner (http://www.stereophile.com/powerlineaccessories/255/).











:whistling

[Michael Redman]

I've bought several types of cables from monoprice.com. The manufacture quality seems very good, and they're about the cheapest you'll find anywhere.

[dtugg]

With HDMI, either it works or it doesn't. $60 for a cable is a complete waste of money. I connect my PS3 and satellite box to my HDTV via cables I bought for like $5 on monoprice.com. The picture couldn't be any better.

[Michael Redman]

While we're on Monoprice, I'll threadjack this further, and mention that I recently bought an HDMI splitter from Monoprice that allows me to show the same thing in the living room and the kitchen (via a 25 foot Monoprice HDMI cable). Its HDCP compliant. $50.

[dtugg]

To be totally fair, I must say that I have had a monoprice cable break. The connector actually broke off in the TV. It wasn't really a problem, I just pulled it out. And since it cost only about $5 (and I had spares), cost wasn't really an issue.

[jsiv]

With HDMI, either it works or it doesn't. $60 for a cable is a complete waste of money. I connect my PS3 and satellite box to my HDTV via cables I bought for like $5 on monoprice.com. The picture couldn't be any better.
It's not really that simple. It only "either works or doesn't" on a packet level. In Full HD (RGB mode), the red, green and blue level of each of the ~two million pixels is transmitted as a separate packet. If there is too much interference, "random" packets can be corrupted. There is no error correction and no possibility of retransmitting it, so the result is a reduction in quality.

That said, there's little evidence of any correlation between price and quality of the cables, so just buy a cheap cable. If there are problems, simply return it as defective.

[Psi Baba]

I bought my HDMI cables at Radio Shack. I think I paid around $10 or $11. I know they can be had for a bit less, but I wanted to pick them up right away rather than ordering them, and that was the best option. Hint: never buy your cables at the same place you buy your TV or DVD player, etc. They're only going to carrying the over-priced rip-offs, figuring if you're new to the technology, you won't know the difference and think that's what you're supposed to pay.

ETA: I wouldn't be surprised if by now you could get them at Dollar General for about $3.

[dtugg]

It's not really that simple. It only "either works or doesn't" on a packet level. In Full HD (RGB mode), the red, green and blue level of each of the ~two million pixels is transmitted as a separate packet. If there is too much interference, "random" packets can be corrupted. There is no error correction and no possibility of retransmitting it, so the result is a reduction in quality.

That said, there's little evidence of any correlation between price and quality of the cables, so just buy a cheap cable. If there are problems, simply return it as defective.


Well, I suppose I may have not phrased it correctly, but a reduction in HDMI quality will be clearly visible (well so I have heard, it has never happened to me) and as far as I am concerned, it means it didn't work.

[dtugg]

Best Buy is probably the worst. They will always try to pressure you to buy the expensive cables. It is pretty much their job. They will actually make more money off of a $100 Monster cable sale than they do off of a $2000 HDTV sale.

ETA: I suppose I am glad that this is how they choose to make their money. It means that I can get their products for cheaper than I otherwise could.

[a_unique_person]

Just got a HD TV and I can connect it to my cable box with either the five separate cables provided by the cable company or a HDMI cable for $60. Is it worth it?

I buy mine off ebay for $10. It works fine.

[thaiboxerken]

Fry's electronics sells HDMI cables for big $$$ in the video/television section. However, if you walk to the other side of the store to the electrical section, you can buy cheap ones for less than $15. This is the same section where I get optical cables for very cheap as well.

[William Parcher]

Just got a HD TV and I can connect it to my cable box with either the five separate cables provided by the cable company or a HDMI cable for $60. Is it worth it?


You haven't mentioned if you opted for HD transmission from your cable company. If you did not, then the HDMI connection will give an inferior picture and aspect ratio as compared to the component (the 3 colors) connection. I found this out myself after assuming the HDMI would be better under all possible circumstances.

[BobTheDonkey]

Here's an article Gizmodo did, including testing, on HDMI cables (Monster Cable vs cheapos):

http://gizmodo.com/268788/the-truth-about-monster-cable-part-2-verdict-cheap-cables-keep-upusually

Interestingly, there is a difference in cable quality - but not at today's resolutions.

[ToddH]

Another vote for monoprice.com.

[ponderingturtle]

Just got a HD TV and I can connect it to my cable box with either the five separate cables provided by the cable company or a HDMI cable for $60. Is it worth it?

Well I like useing HDMI cables for HDTV, but really they shouldn't cost more than $10 or so. Buy them online at say newegg or amazon.

[Jeff Corey]

I bought my HDMI cables at Radio Shack. I think I paid around $10 or $11. I know they can be had for a bit less, but I wanted to pick them up right away rather than ordering them, and that was the best option. Hint: never buy your cables at the same place you buy your TV or DVD player, etc. They're only going to carrying the over-priced rip-offs, figuring if you're new to the technology, you won't know the difference and think that's what you're supposed to pay.

ETA: I wouldn't be surprised if by now you could get them at Dollar General for about $3.
The local Radio Shack gets $35 for the 3 foot cable.
I don't know what Dollar General is.

[Uncayimmy]

I get mine from Fry's Electronics, which is local to me. I believe you can order on-line.

http://www.frys.com/

[lionking]

I wish I had read this before getting suckered into buying a Monster HDMI a couple of years ago. The "salesman" (just out of school by the look of him) told me that if I didn't buy Monster cables I may as well save my money and buy a not-so HD TV, because I would just not get proper HD without them. And I believed him. The store had TVs set up with and without Monster cables, and you could see the difference, but the non-Monster TVs were no doubt of lesser specification.

And to any Aussies here, this was from Harvey Norman, the biggest electrical retailer in the land.

[JoeyDonuts]

You haven't mentioned if you opted for HD transmission from your cable company. If you did not, then the HDMI connection will give an inferior picture and aspect ratio as compared to the component (the 3 colors) connection. I found this out myself after assuming the HDMI would be better under all possible circumstances.

If your cable box is not receiving HD signals from the provider (I don't know why a person would do this if they owned an HDTV) you are providing the highest fidelity signal. Using the D/A conversion of stepping down to component video, while still giving you a maximum resolution of 1080i, still give you a 480i signal that has been upconverted.

Why would you have an HDTV with a cable box attached if you weren't going to get HD content piped to it? Even the most basic of basic cable plans still provide the HD versions of local stations. Do you at least have a VHF/UHF OTA antenna?

Also, the ability or inability to show a clear 480i signal on a native 1080i/p television set is intrinsic to the equipment, not the cabling. It's possible that your particular set locks in the component inputs at a 720p native mode rather than 1080i, thus making the "downconversion" less pronounced through component cable setup than through HDMI. But again, this doesn't have anything to do with an inherent quality of HDMI cabling versus component - it's the video processing in your particular setup on either your cable box, TV, or both.

Oh, and for the OP: If you want to hook your setup through a decent 5.1 channel surround system, you're going to want to use HDMI. Use that component cable and you're limited to stereo audio only depending on your setup. If you don't have a 5.1 system, I would highly recommend getting one. Sony has a great 3-HDMI input 1000w system that is more than sufficient for most viewing needs for about 350 dollars, though it isn't as customizable or user-friendly as other systems out there.

[Darat]

I bought my HDMI cables at Radio Shack. I think I paid around $10 or $11. I know they can be had for a bit less, but I wanted to pick them up right away rather than ordering them, and that was the best option. Hint: never buy your cables at the same place you buy your TV or DVD player, etc. They're only going to carrying the over-priced rip-offs, figuring if you're new to the technology, you won't know the difference and think that's what you're supposed to pay.

ETA: I wouldn't be surprised if by now you could get them at Dollar General for about $3.

Couldn't agree more.

I bought a HD TV about a month ago along with a BluRay player and the shop nearly lost my order because the sales assistant tried to sell me a "hi quality" HDMI cable that was £65, ($90+)- and I only paid £99 for the BluRay player! I was still ripped off as I bought their cheapest and shortest HDMI cable for £14.99 but I was impatient and just wanted to get home and start playing.

ETA: UK folk - Argos generally has some cheap HDMI cables in stock, for around a fiver.

[JoeyDonuts]

Couldn't agree more.

+1. When I did my recent stero install, I had a serious desire to get it up and working as soon as I got home, so I went ahead and bought a spool of speaker wire for the L/R rear surround mounts. (Had to fish them through the attic and down through the all.)

How much d'ya think 100ft of speaker wire should cost?

How much d'ya think I paid for the least expensive one they sold at Ultimate Electronics?

About thirty dollars for 100ft worth of speaker wire. And this was after the salesman spent twenty minutes telling me how my new system was going to sound "muddy" if I purchased their "economy" brand.

[William Parcher]

If your cable box is not receiving HD signals from the provider (I don't know why a person would do this if they owned an HDTV) you are providing the highest fidelity signal. Using the D/A conversion of stepping down to component video, while still giving you a maximum resolution of 1080i, still give you a 480i signal that has been upconverted.

Why would you have an HDTV with a cable box attached if you weren't going to get HD content piped to it? Even the most basic of basic cable plans still provide the HD versions of local stations. Do you at least have a VHF/UHF OTA antenna?

Also, the ability or inability to show a clear 480i signal on a native 1080i/p television set is intrinsic to the equipment, not the cabling. It's possible that your particular set locks in the component inputs at a 720p native mode rather than 1080i, thus making the "downconversion" less pronounced through component cable setup than through HDMI. But again, this doesn't have anything to do with an inherent quality of HDMI cabling versus component - it's the video processing in your particular setup on either your cable box, TV, or both.

Oh, and for the OP: If you want to hook your setup through a decent 5.1 channel surround system, you're going to want to use HDMI. Use that component cable and you're limited to stereo audio only depending on your setup. If you don't have a 5.1 system, I would highly recommend getting one. Sony has a great 3-HDMI input 1000w system that is more than sufficient for most viewing needs for about 350 dollars, though it isn't as customizable or user-friendly as other systems out there.


I found this out when helping a friend set up her cable box to a HDTV. She opted to not pay extra for HD signal from the provider which is AT&T Uverse. It apparently comes through as 480i 4:3 including the local channels. The box offers RF, RCA, Component or HDMI as video outputs. I presumed that HDMI would give the best picture and also have the convenience of carrying the audio signal to the TV. After hooking it up I found the picture to be dark and crappy. None of the aspect ratios offered looked proper either. I went online and found forums discussing this same situation. Everybody recommended the component cables instead of HDMI.

I switched them and it suddenly looked much better including the aspect ratio. Well, I suppose it's as good as 480i may look - which is what you get unless you pay extra for the HD signal. For audio I used an optical output from the box to an amp/receiver that puts out 5.1 to a typical surround speaker arrangement plus subwoofer.

This may be an issue with AT&T Uverse and not other cable companies.

[WildCat]

Oh, and for the OP: If you want to hook your setup through a decent 5.1 channel surround system, you're going to want to use HDMI. Use that component cable and you're limited to stereo audio only depending on your setup. If you don't have a 5.1 system, I would highly recommend getting one. Sony has a great 3-HDMI input 1000w system that is more than sufficient for most viewing needs for about 350 dollars, though it isn't as customizable or user-friendly as other systems out there.
If you're going the 5.1 route why have the sound turned on to your TV speakers at all? I keep my TV speakers off, the sound goes from my satellite receiver to my 5.1 receiver via optical digital cable.

[Cuddles]

You haven't mentioned if you opted for HD transmission from your cable company. If you did not, then the HDMI connection will give an inferior picture and aspect ratio as compared to the component (the 3 colors) connection. I found this out myself after assuming the HDMI would be better under all possible circumstances.

Interesting. I have a non-HD signal going to my TV via an HDMI cable. I've noticed that the left and right of the picture tends to be clipped. Has my problem all along been simply that I've used the wrong cables to plug everything in?

If your cable box is not receiving HD signals from the provider (I don't know why a person would do this if they owned an HDTV)

Because it's virtually impossible to buy a TV that isn't HD these days, but it costs a lot more, both up front and monthly fees, to have an HD Sky or cable box.

[Paulhoff]

They should of course have good ends and be not cheap on the wire. I have'nt priced them, but don't be too cheap.

Paul

:) :) :)

[dtugg]

I can't even watch the standard definition channels. They look horrible.

[Ernie M]

Just got a HD TV and I can connect it to my cable box with either the five separate cables provided by the cable company or a HDMI cable for $60. Is it worth it?

Question: Is your cable company asking you to pay $60 for an HDMI cable?

Do I understand correctly, that you are paying your cable TV provider for a channel package that includes High Definition channels?

And, if you pay for an HD cable box, I believe your cable provider should provide one HDMI cable free of charge. It is my understanding the cable company is responsible for the integrity of their wiring and cable signal to your tv(s), and in order to meet their company standards, they may use company-spec materials, including cable connectors, and cables.

Depending on who your cable provider is, you should be able to get one type of cabling, example: one HDMI cable or a component video cable set (YPbPr cables plus white, and red cables, for the audio) free of charge. I don't understand why the cable company would charge you for an HDMI cable... but they might and might be able to charge, as I don't know your terms of agreement.

[William Parcher]

Interesting. I have a non-HD signal going to my TV via an HDMI cable. I've noticed that the left and right of the picture tends to be clipped. Has my problem all along been simply that I've used the wrong cables to plug everything in?


I saw a clipped picture as well when using the HDMI. Trying all available aspects on the box (in the menu) and the TV didn't help. This clipping was in addition to the poor picture quality.

I ended up switching to component cable and choosing 480i as the menu setting for the cable box. This gives the best picture and no clipping.

I'm not the only one experiencing this because web forums have posts on the exact same thing - but my forum searching was specific for folks with AT&T Uverse.

[Psi Baba]

The local Radio Shack gets $35 for the 3 foot cable.
That's what they charge for Monster Cable:
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4014916
but they also sell a 6-ft. cable for $11.49
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=4023605
I'm sure there are regional price variations, though.

I don't know what Dollar General is.
It's just a chain of really cheap discount stores (not quite an Everything's-A-Dollar store, but nearly). They're mostly in the East and mid-West; there are 235 stores in the state of New York.
http://www.dollargeneral.com/Pages/index.aspx

[Jeff Corey]

Question: Is your cable company asking you to pay $60 for an HDMI cable?

Do I understand correctly, that you are paying your cable TV provider for a channel package that includes High Definition channels?

And, if you pay for an HD cable box, I believe your cable provider should provide one HDMI cable free of charge. It is my understanding the cable company is responsible for the integrity of their wiring and cable signal to your tv(s), and in order to meet their company standards, they may use company-spec materials, including cable connectors, and cables.

Depending on who your cable provider is, you should be able to get one type of cabling, example: one HDMI cable or a component video cable set (YPbPr cables plus white, and red cables, for the audio) free of charge. I don't understand why the cable company would charge you for an HDMI cable... but they might and might be able to charge, as I don't know your terms of agreement.
They don't charge - they just do not provide the HDMI cable. They do provide the component video and audio component sets.
The company is Optimum (Cablevision) and they have a monopoly on cable here.

[RhodyDave]

Others have already said it, but again - monoprice.com

:)

[mike81]

I saw a clipped picture as well when using the HDMI. Trying all available aspects on the box (in the menu) and the TV didn't help. This clipping was in addition to the poor picture quality.

I ended up switching to component cable and choosing 480i as the menu setting for the cable box. This gives the best picture and no clipping.

I'm not the only one experiencing this because web forums have posts on the exact same thing - but my forum searching was specific for folks with AT&T Uverse.

Actually, if you are watching TV on an HDTV, then some of the programs will have black bars on the sides. Some shows are shot in 4:3 aspect ratio and will not fill up a 16:9 screen. Any attempt at changing the aspect ratio, zooming, stretching, or doing anything else to the picture will result in a lower quality image. You may also get an incorrectly proportioned image or some of the top & bottom of the image will be cut off. The correct way is to watch it with the black bars on the sides.

[Ashles]

Whenever I need to buy a cable I seem to keep getting told that it's really best to get one with gold connectors as "gold is the best conductor of electricity".

Of course it isn't, it's silver (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wotsits).
Gold is actually below copper (it just doesn't corrode as much).

But gold just sounds better doesn't it.

I have never yet had the energy to have the argument. I just express great interest in the cheapest cables and watch the salesman look frustrated and slightly hurt.

[LTC8K6]

I have an HDTV but no HD signal from the cable company. As far as I could tell, when I wanted a new TV, I had to buy an HDTV when I really saw no need for one. I do occasionally switch over from the cable to an antenna and look at the broadcast HDTV, which looks fantastic.

I would need to get a different cable box and pay more each month for the HD channels from the cable company, and I already pay the cable company too much money.

[Ernie M]

They don't charge - they just do not provide the HDMI cable. They do provide the component video and audio component sets.
The company is Optimum (Cablevision) and they have a monopoly on cable here.

I would have hoped Cablevision would have provided you with a free-of-charge HDMI cable, given that it's my opinion that what we as consumers pay for cable TV– is unreasonably high.

Besides, look at the amount of cabling they gave you "free" for the component video and audio; five individual cables with RCA ends most likely molded together in a strip. That's a lot of material when compared to the same length of an HDMI cable.

If they or someone else is asking $60 for a six-foot HDMI cable, that is way too expensive. Take the advice of others who mentioned buying from likes of amazon, monoprice, or newegg dot coms.

[Paulhoff]

Whenever I need to buy a cable I seem to keep getting told that it's really best to get one with gold connectors as "gold is the best conductor of electricity".
Gold isn't the best, but it is a good one as you said, But the Advantage of using gold is that it "doesn't corrode at all" (it may get dirty) and therefore does not become a bad contact later on.

Paul

:) :) :)

I use them when I can only because of that.

[William Parcher]

Actually, if you are watching TV on an HDTV, then some of the programs will have black bars on the sides. Some shows are shot in 4:3 aspect ratio and will not fill up a 16:9 screen. Any attempt at changing the aspect ratio, zooming, stretching, or doing anything else to the picture will result in a lower quality image. You may also get an incorrectly proportioned image or some of the top & bottom of the image will be cut off. The correct way is to watch it with the black bars on the sides.

Right, I understand that. The "clipped" 4:3 picture didn't just have the normal black bars on the sides... it had portions of the scene missing on both sides. You could see what was missing when there was text or sports stats, etc.

The HDMI cable was causing picture quality and aspect ratio problems. A switch to composite cable fixed it.

[Reno]

I bought my 10' HDMI cable from a warehouse store - one of those places that piles their stock on the floor and sells everything really cheap. HDMI cable cost me £1.99. Has been working perfectly now for over a year :)

[Cuddles]

I saw a clipped picture as well when using the HDMI. Trying all available aspects on the box (in the menu) and the TV didn't help. This clipping was in addition to the poor picture quality.

I ended up switching to component cable and choosing 480i as the menu setting for the cable box. This gives the best picture and no clipping.

I'm not the only one experiencing this because web forums have posts on the exact same thing - but my forum searching was specific for folks with AT&T Uverse.

Huh, that sounds like exactly my problem. Guess I'll have to dig out some component cables and see if that sorts it out.

Actually, if you are watching TV on an HDTV, then some of the programs will have black bars on the sides. Some shows are shot in 4:3 aspect ratio and will not fill up a 16:9 screen. Any attempt at changing the aspect ratio, zooming, stretching, or doing anything else to the picture will result in a lower quality image. You may also get an incorrectly proportioned image or some of the top & bottom of the image will be cut off. The correct way is to watch it with the black bars on the sides.

I see William Parcher has already answered, and my answer is exactly the same. It's nothing to do with black bars or anything like that. I can happily change the aspect ratio of my TV between 16:9 and 4:3, as well as a few others, and it makes no difference to the fact that some of the picture is simply missing.

[HarryKeogh]

I wish I had read this before getting suckered into buying a Monster HDMI a couple of years ago. The "salesman" (just out of school by the look of him) told me that if I didn't buy Monster cables I may as well save my money and buy a not-so HD TV, because I would just not get proper HD without them. And I believed him. The store had TVs set up with and without Monster cables, and you could see the difference, but the non-Monster TVs were no doubt of lesser specification.

And to any Aussies here, this was from Harvey Norman, the biggest electrical retailer in the land.

http://hd.engadget.com/2009/03/23/monster-hdmi-difference-scam-still-kickin-in-frys-electronic/

Man, this is just sad. Over a year after the internet was set ablaze with rage after seeing Monster's HDMI cable scam, we've just been notified that the tactic is still being used in at least one Fry's Electronics store. For those unaware, the rig works as such: two TVs are set beside each other along with a sign that says "See the Monster HDMI Difference." Trouble is, the "Monster set" (on the right) is connected to its source via an HDMI cable, while the "non-Monster set" (on the left) is connected via composite cable. As in, the lamest looking signal next to using an RF modulator. So, is anyone with any amount of power paying attention to this? We get the feeling "false advertising" is a real understatement of the situation.