Response to Jason, oh no wires again !!

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



> -----Original Message-----
> From: HDTV Magazine On Behalf Of
> Rodolfo La Maestra
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 3:40 PM
> To: HDTV Magazine
> Subject: Response to Jason, oh no wires again !!
>
> ----- HDTV Magazine Tips List -----
>
> Everything is relative. There are things that are tied up to personal
> pleasure and quality that can
> not be measured in saved dollars, not to me, in fact I never look for
> savings regarding personal
> pleasure and quality, not even when I was 15 with my bulb audio amps in
> the sixties ignoring the
> infamous transistor design that was so ruff for my classical music.

The debate about cable costs is not to belittle anyone for how much they
spend or do not spend on cables. Not the best choice of words on my part to
say taken. It's your money to spend as you choose.

On the flip side, the argument that somehow your higher priced components
somehow need high priced cables is flawed from several angles.

> Forgive me Bob; but Jason, I do not believe Bob's argument is a best
> written argument to keep for
> history; regarding the argument itself I would have appreciated a more
> balanced presentation of the
> issues, regarding the effect, perhaps it was ruined by the unnecessary
> ruff tone that was raised at
> the exchange (bordering in the personal), unless one wants to degrade this
> Tips environment to the
> zoo of the AVS forum.

Excuse the gruff writing style. It's not meant as a personal attack toward
anyone and I don't think the point of the discussion should be lost by it.

If you have a better summary of how and why cables need to exceed a certain
dollar amount or come from certain vendors to be effective, I think it
benefits the groups as a whole to understand the reasoning.


> I respect freedom of expression, but I appreciate when the expression is
> not overused. But that is
> past. My point is I would rather not use it for the future as is, we need
> to get to each point in
> depth, I cannot dedicate time to this, I rather not do it now, plus we
> need the help from experts
> that actually build wires, not the friends of the co-workers that asked
> the wire-industry engineers.
>
> I agree in one thing, testing is necessary to establish parameters of
> quality not only to determine
> what is the minimum quality to go rush and proclaim that the lawn-tool
> orange wire is sufficient.

I think it was more of a Halloween orange but let's not get into
trashing Dr. Hsu's credentials.

> Bob, is that what you use for your HDTV? Would the green wire for
> Christmas lights work as well?

Nah, I have a Better Cables subwoofer cable in a lovely lavender that fits
for now.

> What I wanted to
> determine with SI is to get to
> that level of data, so one can determine what is the proportional return
> on jumping in apparent
> quality levels, if there is return.

All the more reason to read whitepapers or study a starter kit, per my
earlier suggestion. The starter kit will cut to the chase of telling you
what design parameters are important in their minds. My perspective is to
simply study and compare to existing design methodologies up to and
including 40 Gbs networking designs.

We have to get away from this idea that this is digital video and it's
therefore somehow more difficult a problem than other digital data protocols
out there. HDMI runs at 165 MHz. We're working on designs today that are
nearly 10x those speeds. Don't make it out to be more than it is.

> ------------------------------------------
> In January 2006 Silicon Image announced the launch of Simplay Labs, LLC
> and the Simplay HD(TM)
> Testing Program. According to the company:
>
> "The Simplay HD Testing Program provides compatibility testing for high
> definition (HD) consumer
> electronics devices such as HDTVs, set-top boxes, audio/video (A/V)
> receivers and DVD players,
> helping manufacturers to achieve compatibility and deliver the highest-
> quality HDTV experience to
> consumers."
>
> "Replacing the PanelLink Cinema (PLC) Partners Program, the Simplay HD
> Testing Program examines
> devices for compliance with the High-Definition Multimedia Interface(TM)
> (HDMI(TM)) and
> High-bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP) specifications, as well
> as for compatibility with a
> suite of other devices that have passed the Simplay HD Testing Program.
> Products that have
> demonstrated adherence to the Simplay HD Compatibility Test Specification
> (CTS) in testing by
> Simplay Labs are identified with the Simplay HD logo.
> ---------------------------------------------

This is called revenue stream. For those that don't know it, it would be a
good idea to at least get a general outline of the history of HDMI. It is a
technology developed and promoted by Silicon Image and they heavily lobbied
and recruited CE manufacturers to get behind the protocol. It evolved from
DVI to today's HDMI. Pretty easy sell when you think about it since there
are no alternatives. Preparation meets opportunity. Not a bad thing at all.
Just need to understand that backdrop before one goes making assumptions.

Testing=certification=licensing fees. That won't win friends, but that's the
gist of it. How much that adds to the end price of the cable you're buying
is probably insignificant. But at the extreme low end it's unlikely that
you'll get the no-name Chinese vendors to go to the trouble. That doesn't by
default mean their cables don't work.

As I write this Joseph has added a beautifully written pieces to that would
support the pro-cable side.....that is if we were discussing analog.

Folks who want to chime in on the HDMI topic need to disconnect themselves
from the extremely subjective arguments of the past regarding analog audio.
That debate was beaten to a standoff. Digital is an entirely different
animal.

Bob




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]