----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
Oh, Rodolfo, YOU ARE SO RIGHT on the cable issue. You're PC analogy is spot
on. The small word which can be a HUGE problem in audio and video digital
signals is jitter. The effects of jitter have been documented in articles
from the sublime to the ridiculous as far the technical depth of the problem
is concerned. Anybody can Google the term and spend days wading through the
amount of material available on the topic. And the effects of a simple piece
of wire (interconnect) in the time domain of the jitter issue can be a
frustrating item to deal with.
I'm not a video expert but having worked in the professional audio world for
more than 30 years I can assure the doubting Thomas's that crap wire,
interconnects and the like can be a major downfall of a properly working
system. And I'm NOT referring to poor mechanical connections here. Simple
signal transmission from point A to point B, short or long distances,
analogue or digital. (Just be aware, readers, that jitter only applies to
digital.) Bits may be bits but when the streaming medium upsets the order of
things (complex impedance issues) the signal at the arriving end is NOT the
same as where it started from. At the audio level people would be amazed to
hear the discussions taking place among the elite studio mastering engineers
at an AES show, for example, with regard to cable preferences. (These are
the guys who determine what we ultimately hear/see coming from that piece of
plastic we take so much for granted: a CD or DVD.) What it boils down to is
the question of a Ferrari or Lamborghini being the better car. Ford and
Chevy need not apply!
The transmission of video data would then be even more critical because of
the HUGE bandwidth compared to audio. There's a lot more to contend with in
getting those little bits from place to place. I've had it demonstrated to
me how a 50foot component ANALOGUE interface can produce seemingly benign
problems. If the R and the G and the B don't all arrive at the same time at
the monitor the picture can be noticeably different when one is able to
compare a delayed vs non-delayed signal. (Putting a few microseconds of
delay on G, for example, can make some projectors look so wrong.)
So, move over, Rodolfo. Or maybe get a bigger space. There're a helluva lot
of us out there who would be more than happy to share your space. We know
what can be heard and seen and what it takes to get that level of audio and
video reproduction. The naysayers can revel in their ignorant bliss.
Atom Shop
----- Original Message -----
From: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 2:03 AM
Subject: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1305
> HDTV Magazine Digest #1305
>
> 1) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Jason Burroughs" <[email protected]>
> 2) HDTV Magazine Forum Update
> by HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
> 3) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 4) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 5) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> 6) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> 7) 1080P viewing Distance
> by Walt Moody <[email protected]>
>
Re: 1080P viewing Distance
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 9) Re: 1080P viewing Distance
> by Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> 10) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
> by "Eric Hyman" <[email protected]>
> 11) Response to Eric regarding PS3 vs player
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 12) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by Nicetry <[email protected]>
> 13) Re: 1080P viewing Distance
> by "Jordan Meschkow" <[email protected]>
>
> You are subscribed to the mailing list <[email protected]>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[email protected]>
> To switch to the FEED mode, E-mail to
> <[email protected]>
> Send administrative queries to <[email protected]>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Jason Burroughs" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:52:51 -0600
> Message-ID: <000101c623df$d75f8b40$690fa8c0@abit>
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:10:55 -0800
> Message-Id: <[email protected]>
> Subject: HDTV Magazine Forum Update
> From: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: [email protected]
>
> There has been activity in the HDTV Magazine Forums:
> New threads: 1
> Unanswered threads: 6
> Updated threads: 2
>
> The following threads are new:
> ************
> Cable Box Question
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2833
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: HD350z
> Last post: 1/27 4:40pm PST
>
>
> The following threads are still unanswered:
> ************
> Anyone in the New Orleans market on here???
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2561
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: mmulhern
> Last post: 11/18 2:35pm PST
> ************
> Best Choice for 42-46" HDTV: DLP vs LCD, 1080?
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2585
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: NWNewell
> Last post: 11/29 12:32pm PST
> ************
> WHICH TV IS BETTER?
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2711
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: claydog99
> Last post: 1/9 10:36am PST
> ************
> Picture starts and stops-audio not synced
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2734
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: wilbil
> Last post: 1/12 8:28am PST
> ************
> 'TV GUIDE' data and ratings
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2813
> In forum: HDTV Programming
> Started by: busto
> Last post: 1/24 1:00pm PST
> ************
> Cable Box Question
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2833
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: HD350z
> Last post: 1/27 4:40pm PST
>
>
> The following threads have had recent replies:
> ************
> Hot Springs Village, AR
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2818
> In forum: HDTV Programming
> Started by: jermunn
> Last post: 1/27 11:33am PST
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:57:19 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Jason Burroughs
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:53:45 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> I knew this was coming but since nobody was responding to Eric I
> volunteered. I should have known
> better, all this was discussed before, this was a good bait Eric.
>
> There will always be people that believe their Home Theaters in a Box for
> $250 would sound as good
> as a Theta pre/amp for $25,000, or their Epson office projector for $800
> would look as good as a
> Sony 4k monster.
>
> Guess who is going to buy which wire, who is going to be able to find
> differences in quality of
> components and wires, who is running the higher risks of sacrificing
> serious investment when not
> maintaining appropriate level of quality in all the components in the
> chain of audio or video.
>
> Computers that buffer even elephants at the other end and put them in a
> row again in a way that they
> look aligned decently enough for their purpose, could be careless about
> jitter and timing effects
> over quality audio and video that might ruin an otherwise great experience
> when affecting the timing
>of a pleasurable presentation.
>
> That is unless one would not care about occasional hand shake errors
> corrected by wonderful
> protocols, HD black/frozen screens for interrupted streaming when missing
> MPEG-2 flags dropped on
> their way, or listening to Beethoven repeating/missing some notes in the
> middle of the Ode to Joy
> 4th movement, or listening them with a different pitch because the clocks
> of sending and receiving
> got out of sync. And all those can all buffer and error correct as good
> as computers.
>
> I could not compare viewing the nuisances of streaming video over the
> internet using computers that
> since the days of rebooting windows 3.1 every 10 minutes got users
> accustomed that they should
> tolerate all the nuisances of failing software and hardware for the sake
> of moving ones and zeros,
> and I did that for 40 years professionally, would I want to tolerate
> experiencing the same on a HT
> environment we are trying to control the best we can in all the stages of
> sound and video to make it
> as pleasurable as possible? not me, it ruins my pleasure.
>
> Now if you would excuse me I will go back to my hole of appreciating
> quality and making all I can to
> control it for my pleasure, wiring is part of it.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Jason Burroughs
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:49:22 -0800
> Message-ID: <01c901c62433$2f3ce5d0$6401a8c0@bobhome>
>
> What they really need, and I believe it's being discussed now, is some
> type
> of locking mechanism for the connector. The design as it is now is flawed,
> IMO and IME.
>
> I'm with ya on the low cost cable idea but the fact is the marketing
> effort
> that goes toward consumer level product is totally different. In the
> technical arena people like yourself will know better, but in the typical
> Joe Sixpack vs. the Best Buy associate, the BS will ultimately sell an
> unnecessarily expensive cable more times than not.
>
> What's insulting are the claims like this taken from the HDMI.org site:
>
> "Low-cost: HDMI provides the quality and functionality of a digital
> interface while also supporting uncompressed video formats in a simple,
> cost-effective manner."
>
> I challenge anyone to roll into a big box store and find one of these cost
> effective cables. I believe they start at $100 and go up these days. Even
> Ratshack is caving-in to the Monster type marketing hype.
>
> Bob
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Jason Burroughs
>> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 11:53 PM
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
>> high
>> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
>> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
>> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
>> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
>> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
>> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
>> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
>> should
>> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables.
>> There
>> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
>> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
>> to
>> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
>> octane gas on a Yugo.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>> same
>> day) send an email to:
>> [email protected]
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:51:18 -0800
> Message-ID: <01ca01c62433$71d62730$6401a8c0@bobhome>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Jason Burroughs
>> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>>
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
>> high
>> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
>> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
>> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
>> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
>> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
>> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
>> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
>> should
>> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables.
>> There
>> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
>> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
>> to
>> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
>> octane gas on a Yugo.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> It should be noted that Silicon Image also markets Fibre Channel products
> with faster I/O speeds than the HDMI spec. IOW, Jason perhaps even works
> with products using SI components running higher I/O speeds with those
> "cheap" cables to support it all.
>
> Cost of components you're connecting does not correlate to the cost you
> need
> to spend on the interconnects. That is simply flawed from too many angles
> and to support the idea is to support the marketing hype machines from
> companies discussed here quite frequently. I realize that discussing
> cables
> is like discussing religion or politics, but in the case of digital cables
> I'm afraid the pro-cable group has only half a leg to stand on
>
> Silicon Image has whitepapers and a starter kit for their SiI9031 chip,
> which is probably their most applicable to this topic. Perhaps your
> contacts
> would offer up that documentation for the discussion/review?
>
> My earlier offer to interface with the Silicon Image guys still stands. My
> office is just a couple miles from theirs. I'm sure if I looked hard
> enough
> I would find clients of ours using their chips. I could offer some
> observations and comparisons of their HDMI interface to similar interfaces
> used for digital data transmission these days.
>
> Bob
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:38:24 -0500
> From: Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>
> Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
> material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
> Thanks.
>
> Walt
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:42:30 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: 1080P viewing Distance
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> Sound and Vision, latest issue.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Walt Moody
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:38 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
> material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
> Thanks.
>
> Walt
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:45:40 -0500
> From: Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: 1080P viewing Distance
>
> Thanks.
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Sound and Vision, latest issue.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>Walt Moody
>>Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:38 PM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>>
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
>>material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Walt
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> From: "Eric Hyman" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:10:06 -0500
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> Will there be any important reason to buy Sony's standalone Blue-Ray
> player
> instead of the subsidized Play Station 3?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:43 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Response to Eric regarding PS3 vs player
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> The features of both as they are today "as unreleased units" seem capable
> of 1080p playback at 60fps
> over HDMI, Sony did not make any special emphasis on feature differences
> when I met them at CES, and
> I was VERY specific
>
> I spent 20 minutes discussing this particular subject with Sony and I even
> told them that as a
> consumer I would have no reason to spend another $500 in a stand-alone
> player to just play Blu-ray
> discs, and I added "so what exactly was the catch?" the answer was that
> PS3 price was intentionally
> set at a Sony's loss to compete, they were not planning to do the same
> with the stand-alone player,
> but now that Toshiba has done exactly that is difficult to tell how low
> Sony would go on the player
> to gain dominance with consumers that could be careless about 1080p and
> gaming.
>
> However, the company has to put the units on the market to properly
> respond to your question. The
> same with Toshiba. Remember this units are suited with the ability to
> make certain changes (like
> firmware upgrades) all the way until release date.
>
> A standalone player would cost twice as much because it will not be
> subsidized like the PS3 for
> establishing their gaming domain.
>
> It is too early for me to assure in writing what you are asking, the AACS
> was also affecting both,
> expect adjustments on the features/specs all the way until a few weeks
> before release.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Eric Hyman
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 3:10 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> Will there be any important reason to buy Sony's standalone Blue-Ray
> player
> instead of the subsidized Play Station 3?
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:19:29 -0500 (EST)
> From: Nicetry <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
> Thanks for putting the wonderful reply on the value of
> quality. Price is not everything
> --- Rodolfo La Maestra <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> ----- HDTV M
Oh, Rodolfo, YOU ARE SO RIGHT on the cable issue. You're PC analogy is spot
on. The small word which can be a HUGE problem in audio and video digital
signals is jitter. The effects of jitter have been documented in articles
from the sublime to the ridiculous as far the technical depth of the problem
is concerned. Anybody can Google the term and spend days wading through the
amount of material available on the topic. And the effects of a simple piece
of wire (interconnect) in the time domain of the jitter issue can be a
frustrating item to deal with.
I'm not a video expert but having worked in the professional audio world for
more than 30 years I can assure the doubting Thomas's that crap wire,
interconnects and the like can be a major downfall of a properly working
system. And I'm NOT referring to poor mechanical connections here. Simple
signal transmission from point A to point B, short or long distances,
analogue or digital. (Just be aware, readers, that jitter only applies to
digital.) Bits may be bits but when the streaming medium upsets the order of
things (complex impedance issues) the signal at the arriving end is NOT the
same as where it started from. At the audio level people would be amazed to
hear the discussions taking place among the elite studio mastering engineers
at an AES show, for example, with regard to cable preferences. (These are
the guys who determine what we ultimately hear/see coming from that piece of
plastic we take so much for granted: a CD or DVD.) What it boils down to is
the question of a Ferrari or Lamborghini being the better car. Ford and
Chevy need not apply!
The transmission of video data would then be even more critical because of
the HUGE bandwidth compared to audio. There's a lot more to contend with in
getting those little bits from place to place. I've had it demonstrated to
me how a 50foot component ANALOGUE interface can produce seemingly benign
problems. If the R and the G and the B don't all arrive at the same time at
the monitor the picture can be noticeably different when one is able to
compare a delayed vs non-delayed signal. (Putting a few microseconds of
delay on G, for example, can make some projectors look so wrong.)
So, move over, Rodolfo. Or maybe get a bigger space. There're a helluva lot
of us out there who would be more than happy to share your space. We know
what can be heard and seen and what it takes to get that level of audio and
video reproduction. The naysayers can revel in their ignorant bliss.
Atom Shop
----- Original Message -----
From: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
To: "HDTV Magazine" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 2:03 AM
Subject: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1305
> HDTV Magazine Digest #1305
>
> 1) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Jason Burroughs" <[email protected]>
> 2) HDTV Magazine Forum Update
> by HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
> 3) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 4) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 5) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> 6) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> 7) 1080P viewing Distance
> by Walt Moody <[email protected]>
>
Re: 1080P viewing Distance> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 9) Re: 1080P viewing Distance
> by Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> 10) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
> by "Eric Hyman" <[email protected]>
> 11) Response to Eric regarding PS3 vs player
> by "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> 12) Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> by Nicetry <[email protected]>
> 13) Re: 1080P viewing Distance
> by "Jordan Meschkow" <[email protected]>
>
> You are subscribed to the mailing list <[email protected]>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <[email protected]>
> To switch to the FEED mode, E-mail to
> <[email protected]>
> Send administrative queries to <[email protected]>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Jason Burroughs" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:52:51 -0600
> Message-ID: <000101c623df$d75f8b40$690fa8c0@abit>
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 01:10:55 -0800
> Message-Id: <[email protected]>
> Subject: HDTV Magazine Forum Update
> From: HDTV Magazine <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: [email protected]
>
> There has been activity in the HDTV Magazine Forums:
> New threads: 1
> Unanswered threads: 6
> Updated threads: 2
>
> The following threads are new:
> ************
> Cable Box Question
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2833
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: HD350z
> Last post: 1/27 4:40pm PST
>
>
> The following threads are still unanswered:
> ************
> Anyone in the New Orleans market on here???
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2561
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: mmulhern
> Last post: 11/18 2:35pm PST
> ************
> Best Choice for 42-46" HDTV: DLP vs LCD, 1080?
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2585
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: NWNewell
> Last post: 11/29 12:32pm PST
> ************
> WHICH TV IS BETTER?
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2711
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: claydog99
> Last post: 1/9 10:36am PST
> ************
> Picture starts and stops-audio not synced
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2734
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: wilbil
> Last post: 1/12 8:28am PST
> ************
> 'TV GUIDE' data and ratings
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2813
> In forum: HDTV Programming
> Started by: busto
> Last post: 1/24 1:00pm PST
> ************
> Cable Box Question
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2833
> In forum: General Discussion
> Started by: HD350z
> Last post: 1/27 4:40pm PST
>
>
> The following threads have had recent replies:
> ************
> Hot Springs Village, AR
> http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2818
> In forum: HDTV Programming
> Started by: jermunn
> Last post: 1/27 11:33am PST
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 10:57:19 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Jason Burroughs
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 11:53:45 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> I knew this was coming but since nobody was responding to Eric I
> volunteered. I should have known
> better, all this was discussed before, this was a good bait Eric.
>
> There will always be people that believe their Home Theaters in a Box for
> $250 would sound as good
> as a Theta pre/amp for $25,000, or their Epson office projector for $800
> would look as good as a
> Sony 4k monster.
>
> Guess who is going to buy which wire, who is going to be able to find
> differences in quality of
> components and wires, who is running the higher risks of sacrificing
> serious investment when not
> maintaining appropriate level of quality in all the components in the
> chain of audio or video.
>
> Computers that buffer even elephants at the other end and put them in a
> row again in a way that they
> look aligned decently enough for their purpose, could be careless about
> jitter and timing effects
> over quality audio and video that might ruin an otherwise great experience
> when affecting the timing
>of a pleasurable presentation.
>
> That is unless one would not care about occasional hand shake errors
> corrected by wonderful
> protocols, HD black/frozen screens for interrupted streaming when missing
> MPEG-2 flags dropped on
> their way, or listening to Beethoven repeating/missing some notes in the
> middle of the Ode to Joy
> 4th movement, or listening them with a different pitch because the clocks
> of sending and receiving
> got out of sync. And all those can all buffer and error correct as good
> as computers.
>
> I could not compare viewing the nuisances of streaming video over the
> internet using computers that
> since the days of rebooting windows 3.1 every 10 minutes got users
> accustomed that they should
> tolerate all the nuisances of failing software and hardware for the sake
> of moving ones and zeros,
> and I did that for 40 years professionally, would I want to tolerate
> experiencing the same on a HT
> environment we are trying to control the best we can in all the stages of
> sound and video to make it
> as pleasurable as possible? not me, it ruins my pleasure.
>
> Now if you would excuse me I will go back to my hole of appreciating
> quality and making all I can to
> control it for my pleasure, wiring is part of it.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Jason Burroughs
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
> high
> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
> should
> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables. There
> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
> to
> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
> octane gas on a Yugo.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:49:22 -0800
> Message-ID: <01c901c62433$2f3ce5d0$6401a8c0@bobhome>
>
> What they really need, and I believe it's being discussed now, is some
> type
> of locking mechanism for the connector. The design as it is now is flawed,
> IMO and IME.
>
> I'm with ya on the low cost cable idea but the fact is the marketing
> effort
> that goes toward consumer level product is totally different. In the
> technical arena people like yourself will know better, but in the typical
> Joe Sixpack vs. the Best Buy associate, the BS will ultimately sell an
> unnecessarily expensive cable more times than not.
>
> What's insulting are the claims like this taken from the HDMI.org site:
>
> "Low-cost: HDMI provides the quality and functionality of a digital
> interface while also supporting uncompressed video formats in a simple,
> cost-effective manner."
>
> I challenge anyone to roll into a big box store and find one of these cost
> effective cables. I believe they start at $100 and go up these days. Even
> Ratshack is caving-in to the Monster type marketing hype.
>
> Bob
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Jason Burroughs
>> Sent: Friday, January 27, 2006 11:53 PM
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
>> high
>> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
>> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
>> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
>> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
>> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
>> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
>> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
>> should
>> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables.
>> There
>> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
>> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
>> to
>> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
>> octane gas on a Yugo.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that
>> same
>> day) send an email to:
>> [email protected]
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> From: "Bob Mankin" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 09:51:18 -0800
> Message-ID: <01ca01c62433$71d62730$6401a8c0@bobhome>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Jason Burroughs
>> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:53 AM
>> To: HDTV Magazine
>> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>>
>>
>> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>> Without getting too deep into this, I must respectfully point out that
>> high
>> end computers run on $5 cables because the standard protocol they are
>> running is simply that easy and cheap to manufacturer cables that support
>> it. HDMI is around 5Gb/sec, roughly the same as fibre channel, which has
>> copper cables for around $30 a 3m section. And they are pushing data
>> involved in national security, healthcare, and nuclear weapons testing,
>> among other things. Now that home theater is entering the world of
>> transmitting discrete bits of data from one component to the next, we
>> should
>> slowly see a/v cables move in the same direction as computer cables.
>> There
>> will always be the $49 'gold standard' belkin Ethernet cable, but only
>> people who don't know better will buy it. Similarly, I am looking forward
>> to
>> the day that HDMI (or other standard) will be as ubiquitous as Ethernet.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>>
>> This is like putting a very low octane gas on a Ferrari, or a very high
>> octane gas on a Yugo.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Rodolfo La Maestra
>>
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> It should be noted that Silicon Image also markets Fibre Channel products
> with faster I/O speeds than the HDMI spec. IOW, Jason perhaps even works
> with products using SI components running higher I/O speeds with those
> "cheap" cables to support it all.
>
> Cost of components you're connecting does not correlate to the cost you
> need
> to spend on the interconnects. That is simply flawed from too many angles
> and to support the idea is to support the marketing hype machines from
> companies discussed here quite frequently. I realize that discussing
> cables
> is like discussing religion or politics, but in the case of digital cables
> I'm afraid the pro-cable group has only half a leg to stand on
>
> Silicon Image has whitepapers and a starter kit for their SiI9031 chip,
> which is probably their most applicable to this topic. Perhaps your
> contacts
> would offer up that documentation for the discussion/review?
>
> My earlier offer to interface with the Silicon Image guys still stands. My
> office is just a couple miles from theirs. I'm sure if I looked hard
> enough
> I would find clients of ours using their chips. I could offer some
> observations and comparisons of their HDMI interface to similar interfaces
> used for digital data transmission these days.
>
> Bob
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:38:24 -0500
> From: Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>
> Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
> material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
> Thanks.
>
> Walt
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:42:30 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: 1080P viewing Distance
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> Sound and Vision, latest issue.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Walt Moody
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:38 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
> material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
> Thanks.
>
> Walt
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 14:45:40 -0500
> From: Walt Moody <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: 1080P viewing Distance
>
> Thanks.
>
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Sound and Vision, latest issue.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
>>Walt Moody
>>Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 2:38 PM
>>To: HDTV Magazine
>>Subject: 1080P viewing Distance
>>
>>
>>----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>>
>>Has anyone seen any info on recommended distances for viewing 1080P
>>material? I'm assuming it would be a little closer than 1080I or 720P.
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Walt
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>>
>>To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
>>day) send an email to:
>>[email protected]
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> From: "Eric Hyman" <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:10:06 -0500
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> Will there be any important reason to buy Sony's standalone Blue-Ray
> player
> instead of the subsidized Play Station 3?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:40:43 -0500
> From: "Rodolfo La Maestra" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Response to Eric regarding PS3 vs player
> Reply-to: <[email protected]>
> Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
> The features of both as they are today "as unreleased units" seem capable
> of 1080p playback at 60fps
> over HDMI, Sony did not make any special emphasis on feature differences
> when I met them at CES, and
> I was VERY specific
>
> I spent 20 minutes discussing this particular subject with Sony and I even
> told them that as a
> consumer I would have no reason to spend another $500 in a stand-alone
> player to just play Blu-ray
> discs, and I added "so what exactly was the catch?" the answer was that
> PS3 price was intentionally
> set at a Sony's loss to compete, they were not planning to do the same
> with the stand-alone player,
> but now that Toshiba has done exactly that is difficult to tell how low
> Sony would go on the player
> to gain dominance with consumers that could be careless about 1080p and
> gaming.
>
> However, the company has to put the units on the market to properly
> respond to your question. The
> same with Toshiba. Remember this units are suited with the ability to
> make certain changes (like
> firmware upgrades) all the way until release date.
>
> A standalone player would cost twice as much because it will not be
> subsidized like the PS3 for
> establishing their gaming domain.
>
> It is too early for me to assure in writing what you are asking, the AACS
> was also affecting both,
> expect adjustments on the features/specs all the way until a few weeks
> before release.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Eric Hyman
> Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 3:10 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1304
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo,
>
> Will there be any important reason to buy Sony's standalone Blue-Ray
> player
> instead of the subsidized Play Station 3?
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe please click: [email protected]
>
> To receive the digest mode (one email a day made from all posted that same
> day) send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2006 17:19:29 -0500 (EST)
> From: Nicetry <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: hdtvmagazine_tips Digest #1303 HDMI Cables
>
> Thanks for putting the wonderful reply on the value of
> quality. Price is not everything
> --- Rodolfo La Maestra <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> ----- HDTV M
