high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

Tributaries are excellent cables I have a component set going from my dvd
player to my Mits. Even better , at least for me, is the factory is located
about ten minutes from my house in Orlando.

Anthony R.


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:22 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital cables.
The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
------------------
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
To: Joe Perfito
Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?

Hi Joe,

I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5 Ethernet
cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's just
1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free' and
other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy the
best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about digital
a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a CRC
and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.

Jason Burroughs

------------------------
Hi Jason,

Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface, your
statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some additional
considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The gauge
should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to about 5
or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can be
used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is the
quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also, at
what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems (source,
cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the same
electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables are
more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.

The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital cables
is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a $15,000
annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece royalty
and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry the
HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at a
charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must be
resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges all
get passed on to the consumer.

Joe Perfito
President
TRIBUTARIES
-------------------------

I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I see
happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super premium
audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal that
simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of the
cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from them
and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers. At
best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there is
guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more you
approach a near-perfect signal.

That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers -
what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass produce
them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to keep
their products outperform the masses.



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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

Good job on the Digital cable issue.

While I too spend money on high end cable for analog, I agree that digital
should not require that approach.

After reading Joe's reply to your inquiry, it seems he is putting a bit of a
spin to it to make it seem worth all the extra money.

Outside of quality connectors on the digitals cables, I agree that the
analog cables manufactures are facing a new paradigm as you suggest.

Larry




-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Anthony Rizzuto
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:26 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

Tributaries are excellent cables I have a component set going from my dvd
player to my Mits. Even better , at least for me, is the factory is located
about ten minutes from my house in Orlando.

Anthony R.


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:22 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital cables.
The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
------------------
From: [email protected]
Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
To: Joe Perfito
Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?

Hi Joe,

I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5 Ethernet
cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's just
1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free' and
other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy the
best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about digital
a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a CRC
and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.

Jason Burroughs

------------------------
Hi Jason,

Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface, your
statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some additional
considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The gauge
should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to about 5
or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can be
used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is the
quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also, at
what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems (source,
cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the same
electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables are
more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.

The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital cables
is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a $15,000
annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece royalty
and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry the
HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at a
charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must be
resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges all
get passed on to the consumer.

Joe Perfito
President
TRIBUTARIES
-------------------------

I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I see
happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super premium
audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal that
simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of the
cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from them
and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers. At
best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there is
guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more you
approach a near-perfect signal.

That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers -
what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass produce
them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to keep
their products outperform the masses.



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]


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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

$12k for a controlled impedance test so I can stamp someone's logo on my
cable? Then another $15k if I want to use the logo more than a year??
Royalties for an "engineering charge"???

I'm in the wrong line of work.

Nice revenue stream there for a cable that is no more technically advanced
than simple Cat5 or Cat6.

Bob



> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:22 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
> honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital cables.
> The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
> pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> ------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> To: Joe Perfito
> Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5 Ethernet
> cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
> benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's just
> 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free' and
> other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy the
> best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about digital
> a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a CRC
> and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
> ------------------------
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface, your
> statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some additional
> considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
> conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The gauge
> should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to about 5
> or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can be
> used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is the
> quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also, at
> what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems (source,
> cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the same
> electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables are
> more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
> signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
> frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
> silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.
>
> The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
> reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital cables
> is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a $15,000
> annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece royalty
> and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry the
> HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at a
> charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must be
> resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges all
> get passed on to the consumer.
>
> Joe Perfito
> President
> TRIBUTARIES
> -------------------------
>
> I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
> quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I see
> happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super premium
> audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
> point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal that
> simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of the
> cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from them
> and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers. At
> best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
> periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
> makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there is
> guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more you
> approach a near-perfect signal.
>
> That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers -
> what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass produce
> them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to keep
> their products outperform the masses.
>
>
>
> 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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Don't forget about the software protocol that runs over that cable.
Their standards cover hardware and software. I agree it seems very high,
but on the other hand, I say good riddance to high dollar cable
companies. As HDMI becomes the standard cable for all home theater gear
(that is the direction we're heading, right?), we'll need so many of
them that they will fall in price in accordance with volume. Five years
from now, what piece of equipment do you picture buying that needs a
cable besides HDMI?

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Bob Mankin
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:24 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

$12k for a controlled impedance test so I can stamp someone's logo on my
cable? Then another $15k if I want to use the logo more than a year??
Royalties for an "engineering charge"???

I'm in the wrong line of work.

Nice revenue stream there for a cable that is no more technically
advanced
than simple Cat5 or Cat6.

Bob



> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:22 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
> honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital
cables.
> The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
> pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> ------------------
> From: [email protected]
> Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> To: Joe Perfito
> Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?
>
> Hi Joe,
>
> I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5 Ethernet
> cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
> benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's
just
> 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free' and
> other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy the
> best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about digital
> a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a CRC
> and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
> ------------------------
> Hi Jason,
>
> Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface,
your
> statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some
additional
> considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
> conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The gauge
> should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to about
5
> or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can be
> used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is
the
> quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also,
at
> what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems (source,
> cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the same
> electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables are
> more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
> signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
> frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
> silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.
>
> The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
> reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital
cables
> is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a
$15,000
> annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece royalty
> and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry
the
> HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at a
> charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must be
> resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges
all
> get passed on to the consumer.
>
> Joe Perfito
> President
> TRIBUTARIES
> -------------------------
>
> I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
> quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I see
> happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super premium
> audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
> point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal that
> simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of the
> cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from them
> and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers.
At
> best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
> periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
> makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there is
> guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more
you
> approach a near-perfect signal.
>
> That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers -
> what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass
produce
> them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to
keep
> their products outperform the masses.
>
>
>
> 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]

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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason, licensing of the software would only come into play for the display
device, STB, DVD, etc that is generating the data. Cabling would/should be
independent.

The cat5 cables you plug into your fibre switches don't care who's protocol
you run across it

The net affect here is to cripple the garage operations which have sprouted
in the last few years offering higher quality cabling. I'm assuming they
trademarked "HDMI", so you can't advertise such cable without sending them a
check?

Wonder if they have exclusives with the connector vendors?

I'd have to check, but I think $12k even surpasses what vendors typically
spend on more complicated tests like EMI.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:28 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Don't forget about the software protocol that runs over that cable.
> Their standards cover hardware and software. I agree it seems very high,
> but on the other hand, I say good riddance to high dollar cable
> companies. As HDMI becomes the standard cable for all home theater gear
> (that is the direction we're heading, right?), we'll need so many of
> them that they will fall in price in accordance with volume. Five years
> from now, what piece of equipment do you picture buying that needs a
> cable besides HDMI?
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Bob Mankin
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:24 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> $12k for a controlled impedance test so I can stamp someone's logo on my
> cable? Then another $15k if I want to use the logo more than a year??
> Royalties for an "engineering charge"???
>
> I'm in the wrong line of work.
>
> Nice revenue stream there for a cable that is no more technically
> advanced
> than simple Cat5 or Cat6.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of
> > [email protected]
> > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:22 AM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
> > honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital
> cables.
> > The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
> > pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> > ------------------
> > From: [email protected]
> > Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> > To: Joe Perfito
> > Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?
> >
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5 Ethernet
> > cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
> > benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's
> just
> > 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free' and
> > other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy the
> > best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about digital
> > a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a CRC
> > and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.
> >
> > Jason Burroughs
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface,
> your
> > statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some
> additional
> > considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
> > conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The gauge
> > should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to about
> 5
> > or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can be
> > used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is
> the
> > quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also,
> at
> > what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems (source,
> > cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the same
> > electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables are
> > more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
> > signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
> > frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
> > silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.
> >
> > The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
> > reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital
> cables
> > is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a
> $15,000
> > annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece royalty
> > and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry
> the
> > HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at a
> > charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must be
> > resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges
> all
> > get passed on to the consumer.
> >
> > Joe Perfito
> > President
> > TRIBUTARIES
> > -------------------------
> >
> > I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
> > quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I see
> > happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super premium
> > audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
> > point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal that
> > simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of the
> > cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from them
> > and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers.
> At
> > best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
> > periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
> > makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there is
> > guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more
> you
> > approach a near-perfect signal.
> >
> > That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers -
> > what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass
> produce
> > them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to
> keep
> > their products outperform the masses.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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]
>
> 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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Good point. The cabling vendors don't need to pay royalties for the
protocol. If someone trademarked 'ethernet', we'd all be in trouble!

Now that I think about it, what a dumb idea to create an industry
standard around a commercial product owned by one company. Even
Microsoft distanced themselves from their wmv codec by taking it open
source.

My head hurts

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Bob Mankin
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:51 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason, licensing of the software would only come into play for the
display
device, STB, DVD, etc that is generating the data. Cabling would/should
be
independent.

The cat5 cables you plug into your fibre switches don't care who's
protocol
you run across it

The net affect here is to cripple the garage operations which have
sprouted
in the last few years offering higher quality cabling. I'm assuming they
trademarked "HDMI", so you can't advertise such cable without sending
them a
check?

Wonder if they have exclusives with the connector vendors?

I'd have to check, but I think $12k even surpasses what vendors
typically
spend on more complicated tests like EMI.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:28 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Don't forget about the software protocol that runs over that cable.
> Their standards cover hardware and software. I agree it seems very
high,
> but on the other hand, I say good riddance to high dollar cable
> companies. As HDMI becomes the standard cable for all home theater
gear
> (that is the direction we're heading, right?), we'll need so many of
> them that they will fall in price in accordance with volume. Five
years
> from now, what piece of equipment do you picture buying that needs a
> cable besides HDMI?
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of Bob Mankin
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:24 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> $12k for a controlled impedance test so I can stamp someone's logo on
my
> cable? Then another $15k if I want to use the logo more than a year??
> Royalties for an "engineering charge"???
>
> I'm in the wrong line of work.
>
> Nice revenue stream there for a cable that is no more technically
> advanced
> than simple Cat5 or Cat6.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine On
Behalf
> Of
> > [email protected]
> > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:22 AM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: high end HDMI cable discussion
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > I emailed several of the boutique cable companies and asked for an
> > honest answer as to why anyone should spend big bucks on digital
> cables.
> > The letter below is from the President of Tributaries Cable. I was
> > pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> > ------------------
> > From: [email protected]
> > Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> > To: Joe Perfito
> > Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end' digital cable?
> >
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > I work in the data storage industry where we routinely use $5
Ethernet
> > cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of data. What is the
> > benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a $50 cable? It's
> just
> > 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all the 'oxygen free'
and
> > other features would seem to be useless. However, I generally buy
the
> > best, so I'm trying to understand what may be different about
digital
> > a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec seems to have a
CRC
> > and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm perplexed.
> >
> > Jason Burroughs
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good one. On the surface,
> your
> > statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI there are some
> additional
> > considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG, 26 AWG and 24AWG
> > conductors can make a significant difference in performance. The
gauge
> > should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic). 28AWG is good to
about
> 5
> > or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15 meters. 24AWG can
be
> > used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One of the variables is
> the
> > quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and the display. Also,
> at
> > what resolution does the signal transfer occur. Some systems
(source,
> > cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other cables on the
same
> > electronics will only deliver a 480i signal. Higher quality cables
are
> > more likely to deliver the higher resolutions.Silver plating of the
> > signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it will give the high
> > frequency signals a lower resistance path at the wire's surface, and
> > silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing over time.
> >
> > The other part of your question has to do with pricing. One of the
> > reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than standard digital
> cables
> > is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the technology, impose a
> $15,000
> > annual fee on the original manufacturer along with a per piece
royalty
> > and engineering charge. In addition, the product, in order to carry
> the
> > HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC testing facility at
a
> > charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails the test, it must
be
> > resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These exorbitant charges
> all
> > get passed on to the consumer.
> >
> > Joe Perfito
> > President
> > TRIBUTARIES
> > -------------------------
> >
> > I still tend to disagree about the importance of an extremely high
> > quality cable, based on my experience with computer cables. What I
see
> > happening is cable manufacturers that are used to making super
premium
> > audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality loss from point A to
> > point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a 'perfect' signal
that
> > simply retransmits lost data and is lossless across the length of
the
> > cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a new catalog from
them
> > and they are moving into other areas such as furniture and speakers.
> At
> > best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and more to the
> > periphery, while their power protection gear is front and center. It
> > makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog' stuff where there
is
> > guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more you pay, the more
> you
> > approach a near-perfect signal.
> >
> > That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees on manufacturers
-
> > what will happen is that the big companies will eventually mass
> produce
> > them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find creative ways to
> keep
> > their products outperform the masses.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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]
>
> 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]

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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Oh Microsoft hasn't distanced themselves all that far from WMV. In fact,
they've fought pretty hard to get the WM9/VC-1 codec incorporated into the
latest generation of chipsets that also support MPEG4. This politicing is
one of the reasons for the slow rollout of next gen chipsets and products
that incorporate them. As usual, MS is not making new friends with this
approach.

There is real fear that they won't truly support the codec for all that long
and will develop something else. Of course the royalty streams will already
be cast in silicon

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> [email protected]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 10:17 AM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Good point. The cabling vendors don't need to pay royalties for the
> protocol. If someone trademarked 'ethernet', we'd all be in trouble!
>
> Now that I think about it, what a dumb idea to create an industry
> standard around a commercial product owned by one company. Even
> Microsoft distanced themselves from their wmv codec by taking it open
> source.
>
> My head hurts
>
> Jason Burroughs
>
>



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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Well I'm no proponent of high end cables, and its been
years since I've used by EE Communications education,
but I wouldn't underestimate the importance of good
quality cabling for digital versus analog signals.

Granted if a cable does not provide a good frequency
response for analog signals, you tend to see/hear the
difference. However, digital, although its 1's and 0's
contains a high level of high frequency signals. As
the higher frequencies get attenuated due to poor
frequency response/bandwidth of a cable, whether it be
due to length or impedance from the connectors, the
1's and 0's pulses start to get rounded off. So the
"square" waves start getting rounded over, and if the
amplitude of the signal begins to drop (signal to
noise ratio), then the receiving circuitry will have a
harder time to recognize the 1's and 0's. So that's
where error correction comes in, and retransmission of
data comes in, but as the error rate increases, then
the overall data rate decreases until you start to
have loss of signal.

So, IMHO, good quality cabling is still important, but
I'm not about to pay $100/ft, and I don't think
digital is any more or less dependant on good cabling
than analog.

But, like I said, its been a while since I've used
these synapses. Have I missed something?


--- Richard <[email protected]> wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> As the response shows this is an issue of distance
> using basic
> transmission line engineering. Fancy stuff is not
> going to play a role
> with digital.
>
> Thank god!
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> [email protected] wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > I emailed several of the boutique cable companies
> and asked for an
> > honest answer as to why anyone should spend big
> bucks on digital cables.
> > The letter below is from the President of
> Tributaries Cable. I was
> > pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> > ------------------
> > From: [email protected]
>
> > Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> > To: Joe Perfito
> > Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end'
> digital cable?
> >
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > I work in the data storage industry where we
> routinely use $5 Ethernet
> > cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of
> data. What is the
> > benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a
> $50 cable? It's just
> > 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all
> the 'oxygen free' and
> > other features would seem to be useless. However,
> I generally buy the
> > best, so I'm trying to understand what may be
> different about digital
> > a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec
> seems to have a CRC
> > and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm
> perplexed.
> >
> > Jason Burroughs
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good
> one. On the surface, your
> > statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI
> there are some additional
> > considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG,
> 26 AWG and 24AWG
> > conductors can make a significant difference in
> performance. The gauge
> > should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic).
> 28AWG is good to about 5
> > or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15
> meters. 24AWG can be
> > used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One
> of the variables is the
> > quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and
> the display. Also, at
> > what resolution does the signal transfer occur.
> Some systems (source,
> > cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other
> cables on the same
> > electronics will only deliver a 480i signal.
> Higher quality cables are
> > more likely to deliver the higher
> resolutions.Silver plating of the
> > signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it
> will give the high
> > frequency signals a lower resistance path at the
> wire's surface, and
> > silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing
> over time.
> >
> > The other part of your question has to do with
> pricing. One of the
> > reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than
> standard digital cables
> > is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the
> technology, impose a $15,000
> > annual fee on the original manufacturer along with
> a per piece royalty
> > and engineering charge. In addition, the product,
> in order to carry the
> > HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC
> testing facility at a
> > charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails
> the test, it must be
> > resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These
> exorbitant charges all
> > get passed on to the consumer.
> >
> > Joe Perfito
> > President
> > TRIBUTARIES
> > -------------------------
> >
> > I still tend to disagree about the importance of
> an extremely high
> > quality cable, based on my experience with
> computer cables. What I see
> > happening is cable manufacturers that are used to
> making super premium
> > audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality
> loss from point A to
> > point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a
> 'perfect' signal that
> > simply retransmits lost data and is lossless
> across the length of the
> > cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a
> new catalog from them
> > and they are moving into other areas such as
> furniture and speakers. At
> > best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and
> more to the
> > periphery, while their power protection gear is
> front and center. It
> > makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog'
> stuff where there is
> > guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more
> you pay, the more you
> > approach a near-perfect signal.
> >
> > That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees
> on manufacturers -
> > what will happen is that the big companies will
> eventually mass produce
> > them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find
> creative ways to keep
> > their products outperform the masses.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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]
>


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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Perry - my mantra is "there's no such thing as a $100 ethernet cable".

You're right about the retries lowering the transmission rate. So you
overengineer the line to be able to overcome a certain amount of that
lost traffic. With HDMI, it's got room for 5Gb/sec. One question would
be, what is the bandwidth of 1080p with a DTS HD lossless soundtrack?

One other point that Joe from Tributaries mentioned is that HDMI has no
retransmission built into the standard. If this is correct, then we
would be no better off than with analog - cable vendors can always say
you might lose one byte of data with a cheaper cable. I've emailed my
contact at HDMI for his input.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Perry Yastrov
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 3:11 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Well I'm no proponent of high end cables, and its been
years since I've used by EE Communications education,
but I wouldn't underestimate the importance of good
quality cabling for digital versus analog signals.

Granted if a cable does not provide a good frequency
response for analog signals, you tend to see/hear the
difference. However, digital, although its 1's and 0's
contains a high level of high frequency signals. As
the higher frequencies get attenuated due to poor
frequency response/bandwidth of a cable, whether it be
due to length or impedance from the connectors, the
1's and 0's pulses start to get rounded off. So the
"square" waves start getting rounded over, and if the
amplitude of the signal begins to drop (signal to
noise ratio), then the receiving circuitry will have a
harder time to recognize the 1's and 0's. So that's
where error correction comes in, and retransmission of
data comes in, but as the error rate increases, then
the overall data rate decreases until you start to
have loss of signal.

So, IMHO, good quality cabling is still important, but
I'm not about to pay $100/ft, and I don't think
digital is any more or less dependant on good cabling
than analog.

But, like I said, its been a while since I've used
these synapses. Have I missed something?


--- Richard <[email protected]> wrote:

> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> As the response shows this is an issue of distance
> using basic
> transmission line engineering. Fancy stuff is not
> going to play a role
> with digital.
>
> Thank god!
>
> Richard Fisher
> www.HDLibrary.com Published by Tech Services
> A division of Mastertech Repair Corporation
>
> [email protected] wrote:
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > I emailed several of the boutique cable companies
> and asked for an
> > honest answer as to why anyone should spend big
> bucks on digital cables.
> > The letter below is from the President of
> Tributaries Cable. I was
> > pleased to get a fairly detailed reply.
> > ------------------
> > From: [email protected]
>
> > Sent: Thu 9/15/2005 5:41 PM
> > To: Joe Perfito
> > Subject: what is the benefit of a 'high end'
> digital cable?
> >
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > I work in the data storage industry where we
> routinely use $5 Ethernet
> > cables to transmit millions of dollars worth of
> data. What is the
> > benefit of using a $600 HDMI cable as opposed to a
> $50 cable? It's just
> > 1s and 0s, and unless there is extreme EMI, all
> the 'oxygen free' and
> > other features would seem to be useless. However,
> I generally buy the
> > best, so I'm trying to understand what may be
> different about digital
> > a/v data compared to computer data. The HDMI spec
> seems to have a CRC
> > and retransmission scheme for lost data, so I'm
> perplexed.
> >
> > Jason Burroughs
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> > Thanks for the e-mail. Your question is a good
> one. On the surface, your
> > statements are legitimate. However, with HDMI
> there are some additional
> > considerations. Depending on length, 30AWG, 28AWG,
> 26 AWG and 24AWG
> > conductors can make a significant difference in
> performance. The gauge
> > should not be less than 28 (30 is problematic).
> 28AWG is good to about 5
> > or 6 meters. 26AWG is ok up to 10 or possibly 15
> meters. 24AWG can be
> > used, in some cases, out to 25 or 30 meters. One
> of the variables is the
> > quality of the HDMI electronics in the source and
> the display. Also, at
> > what resolution does the signal transfer occur.
> Some systems (source,
> > cable and sink) will deliver a 1080p signal, other
> cables on the same
> > electronics will only deliver a 480i signal.
> Higher quality cables are
> > more likely to deliver the higher
> resolutions.Silver plating of the
> > signal conductors will provide 2 advantages; it
> will give the high
> > frequency signals a lower resistance path at the
> wire's surface, and
> > silver will preserve the copper from oxidizing
> over time.
> >
> > The other part of your question has to do with
> pricing. One of the
> > reasons that HDMI cables are more expensive than
> standard digital cables
> > is that the HDMI LLC, the developers of the
> technology, impose a $15,000
> > annual fee on the original manufacturer along with
> a per piece royalty
> > and engineering charge. In addition, the product,
> in order to carry the
> > HDMI logo, must undergo testing by the HDMI LLC
> testing facility at a
> > charge of $12,000 per test. If the product fails
> the test, it must be
> > resubmitted and an additional $12,000 paid. These
> exorbitant charges all
> > get passed on to the consumer.
> >
> > Joe Perfito
> > President
> > TRIBUTARIES
> > -------------------------
> >
> > I still tend to disagree about the importance of
> an extremely high
> > quality cable, based on my experience with
> computer cables. What I see
> > happening is cable manufacturers that are used to
> making super premium
> > audio cables to minimize the inevitable quality
> loss from point A to
> > point B are being faced with a new paradigm - a
> 'perfect' signal that
> > simply retransmits lost data and is lossless
> across the length of the
> > cable. An interesting one is Monster - I got a
> new catalog from them
> > and they are moving into other areas such as
> furniture and speakers. At
> > best buy, Monster cables are being pushed more and
> more to the
> > periphery, while their power protection gear is
> front and center. It
> > makes sense, considering that's back to 'analog'
> stuff where there is
> > guaranteed degradation of the signal and the more
> you pay, the more you
> > approach a near-perfect signal.
> >
> > That's a shame about HDMI imposing such hefty fees
> on manufacturers -
> > what will happen is that the big companies will
> eventually mass produce
> > them for cheap but the boutiques will need to find
> creative ways to keep
> > their products outperform the masses.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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]
>


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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I believe everyone knows where I
stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality system, but some people still want
to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot and solder DVI connectors at
the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for a $5000 system. That is all
I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery oriented designs.

Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will work together to clarify
the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies involved on the article, and I
do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers. Lack of time made me unable to
follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to do that, so I will come
back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the Mag, hopefully by late
February if I still kicking by then.


Now, your question: "what is the bandwidth of 1080p with a DTS HD lossless soundtrack?"

I do not know if you catch the paragraph I dropped on a response to Robert recently regarding the
new standard of DD True HD recently introduced, please read it, that will certainly require a good
chunk of bandwidth, and will only run over HDMI, DVI, or 1394 because is not the typical streamed
audio of digital Coax and Toslink, would I want a good wire with such top quality signal, you bet I
would.

However, just to address the huge requirement of 1080p, I highlight below an excerpt of my own text
on page 116 of the CES 2005 report (you probably have it already), the spec summarized below
pertains to the DVI standard section of the report, but it also applies to HDMI, as follows:

-----------------------------
The DVI standard is able to handle single or dual link connections. A single-link connection
supports up to UXGA resolution of 1600 x 1200 at 60 Hz. Dual-link connections provide bandwidth for
resolutions beyond QXGA (2048 x 1536).

According to DVI specs a single link has 165 MHz/pixels capacity for 3 channels, Red, Green and
Blue, each channel could support up to 1.65 Gbps speed rate, or a total of 4.95 Gbps for the 3
channels (165 MHz x 30 bits x sec). Dual-link connections double that capacity to 330 MHz, with a
speed-rate capacity up to 9.9 Gbps.

The 1080i HD format has 1125 total lines of 2200 pixels x frame (active image 1080x1920), requiring
74.25 MHz/pixels (1125 x 2200 x 30fps). Each pixel contains data for RGB and is implemented by DVI
with 30 bits (8 per each color plus another 6 for encoding). An HD 74.25 MHz/pixel signal would
require 2.2 Gbps speed rate.

A link of 3 channels supporting 165 MHz is sufficient for the 74.25 MHz HD 1080i signal without
requiring the use of the second link, and will also be sufficient to transport a 1080p/60 frames x
second signal at 148.5 MHz without requiring the second link.

If the signal to be transmitted would be higher than the single link capacity of 165 MHz, it would
require the use of a dual DVI link connection, each link will carry half of the signal; the second
link cannot be used with just what is exceeding 165 MHz of the first link. For example, a 200 MHz
signal would be carried with both links operating at 100 MHz each.

HDMI uses the same 165MHz capacity per link; dual-link uses the B connector with the second link
pins.

DVI identifies and auto-configures the connected device. If source equipment is connected with DVI
single link to a display configured as dual link DVI, the image will experience a lower resolution.
Some first generation single link DVI cables use dual link connectors. DVI standard cables have
typically a five-meter distance limitation, although with better quality wiring, such as
fiber-optic, higher distances are possible.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------

Here is another excerpt from the same report about HDMI:

In 2003, a license fee of five cents was applied to each product (four cents for HDMI, 1 cent for
HDCP), that manufacturers had to pay to the HDMI founders and Intel.



HDMI Multi-channel Audio:
-------------------------
In recent articles, there were claims that HDMI was not implemented by some manufacturers as a full
multi-channel connection. The confusion comes from the fact that the majority of first-generation
HDMI devices were TVs with only two-channel stereo, which have no use for the full multi-channel
signal. However, most other equipment, from DVD players to A/V receivers, switchers, etc, is
capable to receive, process, mix, or send the full multi-channel audio content across HDMI.

According to Silicon Image, there is a two-way communication between the source device and the
receiving device by which the receiving device tells the source about its multi-channel
capabilities. The source device can then send a matching signal, such as two-channel stereo to a
TV, or 5.1 DD channel to an A/V receiver. In other words, the source device adapts to the receiving
device when sending the signal.

In the case of an A/V receiver receiving the signal from a 5.1 DD DVD player, both ends of the
connection recognize the need to maintain the 5.1, but the receiver might redirect the signal to a
TV that needs only L/R channels, for which the output of the receiver adapts on only that output
jack by down-mixing the DD stream.

HDMI chips introduced on the first generation batch distributed to manufacturers did not have the
capability of 1080p; second and third-generation chips (mentioned in the next section) have such
capability now. Some 1080p TV sets might not accept a 1080p input for reasons of their internal
design but also for the use of the first batch of chips.
-------------------------------



Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra




-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 5:46 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Perry - my mantra is "there's no such thing as a $100 ethernet cable".

You're right about the retries lowering the transmission rate. So you
overengineer the line to be able to overcome a certain amount of that
lost traffic. With HDMI, it's got room for 5Gb/sec. One question would
be, what is the bandwidth of 1080p with a DTS HD lossless soundtrack?

One other point that Joe from Tributaries mentioned is that HDMI has no
retransmission built into the standard. If this is correct, then we
would be no better off than with analog - cable vendors can always say
you might lose one byte of data with a cheaper cable. I've emailed my
contact at HDMI for his input.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Perry Yastrov
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 3:11 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Well I'm no proponent of high end cables, and its been
years since I've used by EE Communications education,
but I wouldn't underestimate the importance of good
quality cabling for digital versus analog signals.

Granted if a cable does not provide a good frequency
response for analog signals, you tend to see/hear the
difference. However, digital, although its 1's and 0's
contains a high level of high frequency signals. As
the higher frequencies get attenuated due to poor
frequency response/bandwidth of a cable, whether it be
due to length or impedance from the connectors, the
1's and 0's pulses start to get rounded off. So the
"square" waves start getting rounded over, and if the
amplitude of the signal begins to drop (signal to
noise ratio), then the receiving circuitry will have a
harder time to recognize the 1's and 0's. So that's
where error correction comes in, and retransmission of
data comes in, but as the error rate increases, then
the overall data rate decreases until you start to
have loss of signal.

So, IMHO, good quality cabling is still important, but
I'm not about to pay $100/ft, and I don't think
digital is any more or less dependant on good cabling
than analog.

But, like I said, its been a while since I've used
these synapses. Have I missed something?




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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo, in all fairness it needs to be noted that SI is a founder within
the HDMI alliance. It's a given that they would not support any cable that
wasn't HDMI tested and licensed.

Maybe not the best choice for an independent study.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:03 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I believe
> everyone knows where I
> stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality system,
> but some people still want
> to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot
> and solder DVI connectors at
> the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for a
> $5000 system. That is all
> I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery
> oriented designs.
>
> Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
> work together to clarify
> the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies
> involved on the article, and I
> do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers. Lack
> of time made me unable to
> follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to
> do that, so I will come
> back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the
> Mag, hopefully by late
> February if I still kicking by then.
>
>



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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

I'm still very much a student in all of this, and interested in all the
information I can get. My mind is definitely not made up, but know the
way I WANT it to be

I'll be looking forward to a comprehensive analysis. About the bandwidth
stuff, I wondered because of how much overhead there may be for
retransmission. But without any error recovery mechanism, the data are
simply lost, which would naturally degrade the signal, at least a
little.

I guess the good thing about HDMI having a stranglehold on their
technology is (and this is an assumption) that an HDMI labeled cable
must pass their testing. This would mean any hdmi cable sold would meet
their testing standards, and I'll look forward to seeing how stringent
they are.
jason

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Rodolfo La Maestra
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 6:03 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Jason,

I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I
believe everyone knows where I stand regarding that, the cable is
another component in a quality system, but some people still want to
play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot and
solder DVI connectors at the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use
it as the main link for a $5000 system. That is all I am planning to
say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery oriented designs.

Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
work together to clarify the cabling issue from their end of the
industry, no cable companies involved on the article, and I do not for
either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers. Lack of time
made me unable to follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner
or later we have to do that, so I will come back to that commitment
probably after we release the 2006 report on the Mag, hopefully by late
February if I still kicking by then.


Now, your question: "what is the bandwidth of 1080p with a DTS HD
lossless soundtrack?"

I do not know if you catch the paragraph I dropped on a response to
Robert recently regarding the new standard of DD True HD recently
introduced, please read it, that will certainly require a good chunk of
bandwidth, and will only run over HDMI, DVI, or 1394 because is not the
typical streamed audio of digital Coax and Toslink, would I want a good
wire with such top quality signal, you bet I would.

However, just to address the huge requirement of 1080p, I highlight
below an excerpt of my own text on page 116 of the CES 2005 report (you
probably have it already), the spec summarized below pertains to the DVI
standard section of the report, but it also applies to HDMI, as follows:

-----------------------------
The DVI standard is able to handle single or dual link connections. A
single-link connection supports up to UXGA resolution of 1600 x 1200 at
60 Hz. Dual-link connections provide bandwidth for resolutions beyond
QXGA (2048 x 1536).

According to DVI specs a single link has 165 MHz/pixels capacity for 3
channels, Red, Green and Blue, each channel could support up to 1.65
Gbps speed rate, or a total of 4.95 Gbps for the 3 channels (165 MHz x
30 bits x sec). Dual-link connections double that capacity to 330 MHz,
with a speed-rate capacity up to 9.9 Gbps.

The 1080i HD format has 1125 total lines of 2200 pixels x frame (active
image 1080x1920), requiring
74.25 MHz/pixels (1125 x 2200 x 30fps). Each pixel contains data for
RGB and is implemented by DVI with 30 bits (8 per each color plus
another 6 for encoding). An HD 74.25 MHz/pixel signal would require 2.2
Gbps speed rate.

A link of 3 channels supporting 165 MHz is sufficient for the 74.25 MHz
HD 1080i signal without requiring the use of the second link, and will
also be sufficient to transport a 1080p/60 frames x second signal at
148.5 MHz without requiring the second link.

If the signal to be transmitted would be higher than the single link
capacity of 165 MHz, it would require the use of a dual DVI link
connection, each link will carry half of the signal; the second link
cannot be used with just what is exceeding 165 MHz of the first link.
For example, a 200 MHz signal would be carried with both links operating
at 100 MHz each.

HDMI uses the same 165MHz capacity per link; dual-link uses the B
connector with the second link pins.

DVI identifies and auto-configures the connected device. If source
equipment is connected with DVI single link to a display configured as
dual link DVI, the image will experience a lower resolution.
Some first generation single link DVI cables use dual link connectors.
DVI standard cables have typically a five-meter distance limitation,
although with better quality wiring, such as fiber-optic, higher
distances are possible.
-------------------------------
-------------------------------

Here is another excerpt from the same report about HDMI:

In 2003, a license fee of five cents was applied to each product (four
cents for HDMI, 1 cent for HDCP), that manufacturers had to pay to the
HDMI founders and Intel.



HDMI Multi-channel Audio:
-------------------------
In recent articles, there were claims that HDMI was not implemented by
some manufacturers as a full multi-channel connection. The confusion
comes from the fact that the majority of first-generation HDMI devices
were TVs with only two-channel stereo, which have no use for the full
multi-channel signal. However, most other equipment, from DVD players
to A/V receivers, switchers, etc, is capable to receive, process, mix,
or send the full multi-channel audio content across HDMI.

According to Silicon Image, there is a two-way communication between the
source device and the receiving device by which the receiving device
tells the source about its multi-channel capabilities. The source
device can then send a matching signal, such as two-channel stereo to a
TV, or 5.1 DD channel to an A/V receiver. In other words, the source
device adapts to the receiving device when sending the signal.

In the case of an A/V receiver receiving the signal from a 5.1 DD DVD
player, both ends of the connection recognize the need to maintain the
5.1, but the receiver might redirect the signal to a TV that needs only
L/R channels, for which the output of the receiver adapts on only that
output jack by down-mixing the DD stream.

HDMI chips introduced on the first generation batch distributed to
manufacturers did not have the capability of 1080p; second and
third-generation chips (mentioned in the next section) have such
capability now. Some 1080p TV sets might not accept a 1080p input for
reasons of their internal design but also for the use of the first batch
of chips.
-------------------------------



Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra




-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
[email protected]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 5:46 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Perry - my mantra is "there's no such thing as a $100 ethernet cable".

You're right about the retries lowering the transmission rate. So you
overengineer the line to be able to overcome a certain amount of that
lost traffic. With HDMI, it's got room for 5Gb/sec. One question would
be, what is the bandwidth of 1080p with a DTS HD lossless soundtrack?

One other point that Joe from Tributaries mentioned is that HDMI has no
retransmission built into the standard. If this is correct, then we
would be no better off than with analog - cable vendors can always say
you might lose one byte of data with a cheaper cable. I've emailed my
contact at HDMI for his input.

Jason Burroughs


-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
Of Perry Yastrov
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 3:11 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Well I'm no proponent of high end cables, and its been years since I've
used by EE Communications education, but I wouldn't underestimate the
importance of good quality cabling for digital versus analog signals.

Granted if a cable does not provide a good frequency response for analog
signals, you tend to see/hear the difference. However, digital, although
its 1's and 0's contains a high level of high frequency signals. As the
higher frequencies get attenuated due to poor frequency
response/bandwidth of a cable, whether it be due to length or impedance
from the connectors, the 1's and 0's pulses start to get rounded off. So
the "square" waves start getting rounded over, and if the amplitude of
the signal begins to drop (signal to noise ratio), then the receiving
circuitry will have a harder time to recognize the 1's and 0's. So
that's where error correction comes in, and retransmission of data comes
in, but as the error rate increases, then the overall data rate
decreases until you start to have loss of signal.

So, IMHO, good quality cabling is still important, but I'm not about to
pay $100/ft, and I don't think digital is any more or less dependant on
good cabling than analog.

But, like I said, its been a while since I've used these synapses. Have
I missed something?




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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Bob,

I am aware that SI is a cofounder within the DVI and HDMI groups, but if the work is done with SI it
would be based and oriented to highlight the requirements to meet the license, rather than a
publicity for certain brand names that paid and passed.

Would you find preferable that the work be based on information from cable manufacturers like
Monster Cable and Audioquest? I would not think so, and it would get much more complicated due to
their differences on materials and designs.

Regardless if the dollars that are exchanged between companies for testing/licensing are found
reasonable or not by a consumer, if SI would not support a given cable because it does not meet the
license requirements it should of the interest of any consumer to know it rather than ignoring it
and buy one because is cheap at www site.

I did not mention that the work would be an independent study, and I still believe necessary to
disclose what are the requirements of SI to offer clarity to the public from a standard point of
view, not from a cable manufacturer point of view.

And, for example, help clarify doubts originated from comments that 1's and 0's on a wire would get
there anyway, so, given equal lengths, what would be the requirements for the transmission to be
done as needed, a consumer could then add more dollars for gold and silver bullets on top of that if
that makes the person more comfortable relative to the rest of the investment.

Perhaps you might want to suggest alternative choices, but I would not think that ignoring SI and
their standard requirements, numerical and otherwise, would be a wise direction, on second thoughts,
I would love if someone else volunteers on doing the task, I would be a good reader.


Rodolfo La Maestra





-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Bob Mankin
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:49 PM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo, in all fairness it needs to be noted that SI is a founder within
the HDMI alliance. It's a given that they would not support any cable that
wasn't HDMI tested and licensed.

Maybe not the best choice for an independent study.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:03 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Jason,
>
> I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I believe
> everyone knows where I
> stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality system,
> but some people still want
> to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot
> and solder DVI connectors at
> the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for a
> $5000 system. That is all
> I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery
> oriented designs.
>
> Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
> work together to clarify
> the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies
> involved on the article, and I
> do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers. Lack
> of time made me unable to
> follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to
> do that, so I will come
> back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the
> Mag, hopefully by late
> February if I still kicking by then.
>
>



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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I didn't mean to imply that the testing would be invalid or non-informative.
I think it just needs to be painted with that alliance membership as a
backdrop. By default, you'll only be testing licensed cables. It won't be
able to truly tell readers if low cost cables make the cut. I think it's
highly unlikely SI would go there as is short circuits the revenue stream
model which these sorts of alliances have worked to build.

I'm certainly not suggesting a cable co for these tests. That would be a
worse choice.

While I agree that AV should be considered on the system level, I don't
think the litmus test for interconnect prices should be the list price of
the components being connected. That's just flawed from many angles. Jason's
fibre channel references are excellent real world examples of high
frequency, critical path signals being transmitted over fairly inexpensive
interconnects.

When I get some time next week I'm going to dig up the HDMI spec and I
believe we might even have some app notes around the office. At first read,
the speeds you're talking about here are not all that special relative to
what we're doing in board level design today. Within your contacts at SI,
can they provide you with that app notes as it applies to their chipsets?
This is not proprietary information, usually, but the type of specs you can
get via sales or tech support contacts. I think that would be interesting to
see.

As a side note, I'm currently shopping for some new office space not too far
from SI's HQ in Sunnyvale, CA. If there is anything I can do to assist on
this project, drop me a note. I wouldn't mind getting involved with that
sort of testing, but would first have to temper my strong desire to do some
myth busting over cables

In the end, if one can show that the $25 cable will do the job every bit as
good at the $600 cable, then I think you've done some good for the consumer.
There will spec floor above which claims of increased performance will be
quite questionable.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:21 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Bob,
>
> I am aware that SI is a cofounder within the DVI and HDMI groups, but if
> the work is done with SI it
> would be based and oriented to highlight the requirements to meet the
> license, rather than a
> publicity for certain brand names that paid and passed.
>
> Would you find preferable that the work be based on information from cable
> manufacturers like
> Monster Cable and Audioquest? I would not think so, and it would get much
> more complicated due to
> their differences on materials and designs.
>
> Regardless if the dollars that are exchanged between companies for
> testing/licensing are found
> reasonable or not by a consumer, if SI would not support a given cable
> because it does not meet the
> license requirements it should of the interest of any consumer to know it
> rather than ignoring it
> and buy one because is cheap at www site.
>
> I did not mention that the work would be an independent study, and I still
> believe necessary to
> disclose what are the requirements of SI to offer clarity to the public
> from a standard point of
> view, not from a cable manufacturer point of view.
>
> And, for example, help clarify doubts originated from comments that 1's
> and 0's on a wire would get
> there anyway, so, given equal lengths, what would be the requirements for
> the transmission to be
> done as needed, a consumer could then add more dollars for gold and silver
> bullets on top of that if
> that makes the person more comfortable relative to the rest of the
> investment.
>
> Perhaps you might want to suggest alternative choices, but I would not
> think that ignoring SI and
> their standard requirements, numerical and otherwise, would be a wise
> direction, on second thoughts,
> I would love if someone else volunteers on doing the task, I would be a
> good reader.
>
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Bob Mankin
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:49 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo, in all fairness it needs to be noted that SI is a founder within
> the HDMI alliance. It's a given that they would not support any cable that
> wasn't HDMI tested and licensed.
>
> Maybe not the best choice for an independent study.
>
> Bob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of
> > Rodolfo La Maestra
> > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:03 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Jason,
> >
> > I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I
> believe
> > everyone knows where I
> > stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality
> system,
> > but some people still want
> > to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot
> > and solder DVI connectors at
> > the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for
> a
> > $5000 system. That is all
> > I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery
> > oriented designs.
> >
> > Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
> > work together to clarify
> > the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies
> > involved on the article, and I
> > do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers.
> Lack
> > of time made me unable to
> > follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to
> > do that, so I will come
> > back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the
> > Mag, hopefully by late
> > February if I still kicking by then.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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]


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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Bob,

I believe you misunderstood

-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Bob Mankin
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 11:57 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I didn't mean to imply that the testing would be invalid or non-informative.
I think it just needs to be painted with that alliance membership as a
backdrop. By default, you'll only be testing licensed cables. It won't be
able to truly tell readers if low cost cables make the cut. I think it's
highly unlikely SI would go there as is short circuits the revenue stream
model which these sorts of alliances have worked to build.

I'm certainly not suggesting a cable co for these tests. That would be a
worse choice.

While I agree that AV should be considered on the system level, I don't
think the litmus test for interconnect prices should be the list price of
the components being connected. That's just flawed from many angles. Jason's
fibre channel references are excellent real world examples of high
frequency, critical path signals being transmitted over fairly inexpensive
interconnects.

When I get some time next week I'm going to dig up the HDMI spec and I
believe we might even have some app notes around the office. At first read,
the speeds you're talking about here are not all that special relative to
what we're doing in board level design today. Within your contacts at SI,
can they provide you with that app notes as it applies to their chipsets?
This is not proprietary information, usually, but the type of specs you can
get via sales or tech support contacts. I think that would be interesting to
see.

As a side note, I'm currently shopping for some new office space not too far
from SI's HQ in Sunnyvale, CA. If there is anything I can do to assist on
this project, drop me a note. I wouldn't mind getting involved with that
sort of testing, but would first have to temper my strong desire to do some
myth busting over cables

In the end, if one can show that the $25 cable will do the job every bit as
good at the $600 cable, then I think you've done some good for the consumer.
There will spec floor above which claims of increased performance will be
quite questionable.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:21 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Bob,
>
> I am aware that SI is a cofounder within the DVI and HDMI groups, but if
> the work is done with SI it
> would be based and oriented to highlight the requirements to meet the
> license, rather than a
> publicity for certain brand names that paid and passed.
>
> Would you find preferable that the work be based on information from cable
> manufacturers like
> Monster Cable and Audioquest? I would not think so, and it would get much
> more complicated due to
> their differences on materials and designs.
>
> Regardless if the dollars that are exchanged between companies for
> testing/licensing are found
> reasonable or not by a consumer, if SI would not support a given cable
> because it does not meet the
> license requirements it should of the interest of any consumer to know it
> rather than ignoring it
> and buy one because is cheap at www site.
>
> I did not mention that the work would be an independent study, and I still
> believe necessary to
> disclose what are the requirements of SI to offer clarity to the public
> from a standard point of
> view, not from a cable manufacturer point of view.
>
> And, for example, help clarify doubts originated from comments that 1's
> and 0's on a wire would get
> there anyway, so, given equal lengths, what would be the requirements for
> the transmission to be
> done as needed, a consumer could then add more dollars for gold and silver
> bullets on top of that if
> that makes the person more comfortable relative to the rest of the
> investment.
>
> Perhaps you might want to suggest alternative choices, but I would not
> think that ignoring SI and
> their standard requirements, numerical and otherwise, would be a wise
> direction, on second thoughts,
> I would love if someone else volunteers on doing the task, I would be a
> good reader.
>
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Bob Mankin
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:49 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo, in all fairness it needs to be noted that SI is a founder within
> the HDMI alliance. It's a given that they would not support any cable that
> wasn't HDMI tested and licensed.
>
> Maybe not the best choice for an independent study.
>
> Bob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of
> > Rodolfo La Maestra
> > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:03 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Jason,
> >
> > I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I
> believe
> > everyone knows where I
> > stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality
> system,
> > but some people still want
> > to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot
> > and solder DVI connectors at
> > the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for
> a
> > $5000 system. That is all
> > I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery
> > oriented designs.
> >
> > Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
> > work together to clarify
> > the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies
> > involved on the article, and I
> > do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers.
> Lack
> > of time made me unable to
> > follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to
> > do that, so I will come
> > back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the
> > Mag, hopefully by late
> > February if I still kicking by then.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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]


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]

----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Bob,

I believe you misunderstood the purpose of what I agreed to do with SI.

I am not planning to test anything, I just wanted to see how we can clarify the requirements of HDMI
over "any" cable to provide a budget-restricted consumer better leverage than today in evaluating if
it is worth paying for overpriced silver bullets when the digital signal would arrive well any way
choosing another cable that still meets the requirements for that cable length and application.

I do not know how far SI would want to get into the subject considering how sensitive this is to the
cable industry, in fact I anticipate that SI might want to restrict their input to a superficial
level. At this point anything is better that what we have now, which is nothing (while the cable
companies shooting high to make a profit on HDMI as well).

The more I look at it the more I am prepared to accept that the outcome of that effort might end up
like the typical zoo of high-end cabling for analog purposes, but I am willing to see what SI wants
to say about before closing the door on their face.

Thanks for you offer to participate in the task I will keep that in mind.

Best Regards,

Rodolfo La Maestra




-----Original Message-----
From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
Bob Mankin
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 11:57 AM
To: HDTV Magazine
Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion


----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----

Rodolfo,

I didn't mean to imply that the testing would be invalid or non-informative.
I think it just needs to be painted with that alliance membership as a
backdrop. By default, you'll only be testing licensed cables. It won't be
able to truly tell readers if low cost cables make the cut. I think it's
highly unlikely SI would go there as is short circuits the revenue stream
model which these sorts of alliances have worked to build.

I'm certainly not suggesting a cable co for these tests. That would be a
worse choice.

While I agree that AV should be considered on the system level, I don't
think the litmus test for interconnect prices should be the list price of
the components being connected. That's just flawed from many angles. Jason's
fibre channel references are excellent real world examples of high
frequency, critical path signals being transmitted over fairly inexpensive
interconnects.

When I get some time next week I'm going to dig up the HDMI spec and I
believe we might even have some app notes around the office. At first read,
the speeds you're talking about here are not all that special relative to
what we're doing in board level design today. Within your contacts at SI,
can they provide you with that app notes as it applies to their chipsets?
This is not proprietary information, usually, but the type of specs you can
get via sales or tech support contacts. I think that would be interesting to
see.

As a side note, I'm currently shopping for some new office space not too far
from SI's HQ in Sunnyvale, CA. If there is anything I can do to assist on
this project, drop me a note. I wouldn't mind getting involved with that
sort of testing, but would first have to temper my strong desire to do some
myth busting over cables

In the end, if one can show that the $25 cable will do the job every bit as
good at the $600 cable, then I think you've done some good for the consumer.
There will spec floor above which claims of increased performance will be
quite questionable.

Bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:21 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Bob,
>
> I am aware that SI is a cofounder within the DVI and HDMI groups, but if
> the work is done with SI it
> would be based and oriented to highlight the requirements to meet the
> license, rather than a
> publicity for certain brand names that paid and passed.
>
> Would you find preferable that the work be based on information from cable
> manufacturers like
> Monster Cable and Audioquest? I would not think so, and it would get much
> more complicated due to
> their differences on materials and designs.
>
> Regardless if the dollars that are exchanged between companies for
> testing/licensing are found
> reasonable or not by a consumer, if SI would not support a given cable
> because it does not meet the
> license requirements it should of the interest of any consumer to know it
> rather than ignoring it
> and buy one because is cheap at www site.
>
> I did not mention that the work would be an independent study, and I still
> believe necessary to
> disclose what are the requirements of SI to offer clarity to the public
> from a standard point of
> view, not from a cable manufacturer point of view.
>
> And, for example, help clarify doubts originated from comments that 1's
> and 0's on a wire would get
> there anyway, so, given equal lengths, what would be the requirements for
> the transmission to be
> done as needed, a consumer could then add more dollars for gold and silver
> bullets on top of that if
> that makes the person more comfortable relative to the rest of the
> investment.
>
> Perhaps you might want to suggest alternative choices, but I would not
> think that ignoring SI and
> their standard requirements, numerical and otherwise, would be a wise
> direction, on second thoughts,
> I would love if someone else volunteers on doing the task, I would be a
> good reader.
>
>
> Rodolfo La Maestra
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Bob Mankin
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 9:49 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
>
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Rodolfo, in all fairness it needs to be noted that SI is a founder within
> the HDMI alliance. It's a given that they would not support any cable that
> wasn't HDMI tested and licensed.
>
> Maybe not the best choice for an independent study.
>
> Bob
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf
> Of
> > Rodolfo La Maestra
> > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 4:03 PM
> > To: HDTV Magazine
> > Subject: Re: high end HDMI cable discussion
> >
> > ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
> >
> > Jason,
> >
> > I am not planning to get into the discussion of cabling quality, I
> believe
> > everyone knows where I
> > stand regarding that, the cable is another component in a quality
> system,
> > but some people still want
> > to play roulette and make their own cable from zip cord from Home Depot
> > and solder DVI connectors at
> > the end, and feel happy they save $100, and use it as the main link for
> a
> > $5000 system. That is all
> > I am planning to say, I am not a proponent of silver bullets or battery
> > oriented designs.
> >
> > Coincidently, last year I committed myself to Silicon Image that we will
> > work together to clarify
> > the cabling issue from their end of the industry, no cable companies
> > involved on the article, and I
> > do not for either, my objective was and is "just" protect consumers.
> Lack
> > of time made me unable to
> > follow thru with the plan, but I believe that sooner or later we have to
> > do that, so I will come
> > back to that commitment probably after we release the 2006 report on the
> > Mag, hopefully by late
> > February if I still kicking by then.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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]


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]