Wally World has a similar cable on their website for six bucks with free site-to-store shipping. Worth three bucks for me to have it pop into my mailbox. In for one. Or two. Two cables. One Woot. Or something.

overdoer wrote:As a brick & mortar guy... the "hertz" rating has nothing to do with bandwith. Bandwidth just determines how much information can be contained per packet, not per second. Faster HDMI cables--10.2 gbps, 14.3 gbps, up to 17.8 gbps--move these packets along faster, hence the increased frame rate capabilities.

LOL.

1) There is no "Hz" rating for HDMI cables. As someone has already pointed out, there are only 5 types standard/high speed, with or without Ethernet, and automotive. http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx Anything beyond those 5 types is, pure and simple, marketing BS.

2) You say bandwidth isn't info per second, then cite figures (gbps - gigabits per second) which contradict that claim as proof. That's funny.

3) You claim that the packets "move along faster" on your pricey cables. So, apparently these "480 Hz" cables you're selling operate at faster-than-light speeds. OK, if you say so, you are after all the "bricks and mortar" guy.

NintendoGal wrote:What specification are these? I didn't see any mention of HDMI 1.4b, so I assume they're not.

yes they are

buffaloed wrote:It's a good deal if you specifically need two 12' High Speed HDMI Cables. I don't need anything longer than 6' and I'm in the process of replacing a couple of those with 3' cables to clean up the rat's nest in my entertainment center. HDMI cables aren't particularly flexible. They don't tuck away neatly. There's also more signal loss as cable length increases. If you need 12' cables get these, but don't get longer cables than you need.

Although I agree with your premise in general (don't buy longer than you need) I've read repeatedly that noticeable signal degradation only becomes apparent at lengths exceeding 50'.

RegalT wrote:yes they are

Exactly.

I find it amazing how little people actually know about the pieces of wire connecting their bits. Is it just me or are cables so stupidly simple that your average Joe can't be arsed to look at it for more than what color the connector is?

No one has definatively answered my question. Does refresh rate, "Hz" matter on HDMI cables?

buffaloed wrote: There's also more signal loss as cable length increases.

In order for you to start seeing a significant amount of signal loss to affect your picture, your looking at distances above 15ft, but sometimes much more. A better explanation of this can be found here:

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/hdmi-cables.htm

I'm in for one.

breakmedown wrote:I can personally tell you that there is a quality difference in component cables and cheap HDMI cables when on the Xbox 360. The HDMI cable (which I paid $30 for an 8ft section over a year ago) was noticeably better. That's the only thing I've personally tried and noted a difference on, though.

The one thing I will not replace with an HDMI cable is my optical sound cable. It's a must, as Hi Def sound is a priority to me, even more so than Hi Def pictures.

And as for "you get what you pay for" technology increases so fast that most users who care about spending more money won't get any better of a product because it's "in the long run" that cheaper products don't last. So for now, these are just as good as $75 cables and in 3 years when they aren't, technology will have changed and you'll have new cables anyway.

I'm in for a pair, woot! Thanks :-)

Not only that, but their is no difference between the expensive cables and cheap cables, beside price paid.

http://reviews.cnet.com/hdmi-guide/

bop13 wrote:No one has definatively answered my question. Does refresh rate, "Hz" matter on HDMI cables?

It matters with regard to the price you pay. It does not matter for whether the cable will work.

Here's a definitive reference, from the people who create the HDMI standards: http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/finding_right_cable.aspx and here's another: http://www.hdmi.org/manufacturer/hdmi_1_4/hdmi_1_4_faq.aspx#35b

Yes, it's really that simple.

The cables being sold here will work just fine between any two HDMI devices, and support all the capabilites of those devices. The only exception would be devices which support Ethernet over HDMI, of which there currently are none.

Oh, sure, these will work, but to really get the best results you need to disassemble your electronics and solder them together directly. Then you build a lead-lined entertainment center to block any outside interference. Anyone who doesn't do this may as well go get a 1950's B&W TV and hook it up to rabbit ears. You just don't understand what it means to be a true technophile.

From my experience, the higher end HDMI cables are the best. I've had some problems with the el' cheapo brands, especially if I get two cables near each other or near other cables.

It could just be a problem with my equipment, but when I traded in quality cables the problem disappeared.

3goldens wrote:
Remember that heart rendering letter...

What a disgusting image - and just after St. Valentine's Day!

I don't think you could render much lard from the average heart. Only if the donor was extremely arteriosclerotic might it be worth the gruesome effort.

Or did you mean "heart-rending"?

treedweller wrote:Oh, sure, these will work, but to really get the best results you need to disassemble your electronics and solder them together directly. Then you build a lead-lined entertainment center to block any outside interference. Anyone who doesn't do this may as well go get a 1950's B&W TV and hook it up to rabbit ears. You just don't understand what it means to be a true technophile.

Thank god I don't understand that.

I'm sorry but my Monster Cables work great. While I spent some money on them I know I am getting top notch quality from a great company!!! I would rather spend the money up front now then keep buying inferior cables!

Dear Monster Cable,
I submitted a testimonial on your behalf regarding your overpriced crap .Please send me a 100 dollar gift card.

bop13 wrote:Thanks for the info. That said, I think I will buy these for my cable box and game console, and get the 240/480 for my blu ray player. Let me know if you think this is mixed up.

You'd be wasting your money. Here's how it works:

The signal from the source (let's talk 1080 resolution, for instance, and we won't go into 3D here) is either 1080i or 1080p. If it's "i", it's interlaced, meaning each field (at 60Hz) is half the picture, every other line. It takes two half-frames to make a full frame, of course, so you're effectively getting 30fps. On the other hand, if it's "p", the source is sending a full 1080 frame each time, at 60 Hz, so you're getting 60fps. Either way, the half or full frames are only transmitted at 60 Hz. The source data is NOT 120 Hz, 240 Hz, or 480 Hz.

Your TV, on the other hand, may refresh at these faster rates. In this case, your TV is taking 60Hz source data and interpolating extra frames (if you have something like Motion processing turned on), or just displaying each frame multiple times (or keeps each frame displayed for multiple refreshes). This is after it gets the data from the cable, so the "speed" of the cable has no effect. It's not the speed it's receiving the data, but what it does with it after it gets it. Rating cables for higher refresh rates is pure marketing gimmickry. (rating them "standard" or "high speed" is not)

kstatejake wrote:Why anyone would pay $50+ for an HDMI cable at a brick-and-mortar store is beyond me.

To save money off the internet price, of course.

Oh wait - sold out. They'll be back for $5,000 soon, though.

http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#45

Q. What is the difference between a “Standard” HDMI cable and a “High-Speed” HDMI cable?

Recently, HDMI Licensing, LLC announced that cables would be tested as Standard or High-Speed cables.

* Standard (or “category 1”) HDMI cables have been tested to perform at speeds of 75Mhz or up to 2.25Gbps, which is the equivalent of a 720p/1080i signal.
* High Speed (or “category 2”) HDMI cables have been tested to perform at speeds of 340Mhz or up to 10.2Gbps, which is the highest bandwidth currently available over an HDMI cable and can successfully handle 1080p signals including those at increased color depths and/or increased refresh rates from the Source. High-Speed cables are also able to accommodate higher resolution displays, such as WQXGA cinema monitors (resolution of 2560 x 1600).

I live in Texas so I must pay sales tax. Normally it's 8.25%. Why does WOOT charge ~14.5% sales tax?? Are they also taxing the shipping fee?

Sorry to tell you guys .. but for the first time in 2 years ... woot's deal is not the best deal out there ..

here is a HDMI cable from amazon for $3.92 after tax+shipping ...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000AA2RCY/ref=oss_product

tetchypoo wrote:I am currently looking at two unused HDMI cables. So why in the name of heck am I considering buying six more?

And as we all know, Woot exists exclusively for your benefit and yours alone.

There's no quality difference between a cheap $5 HDMI cable and a $100 "quality" HDMI cable. The signal is digital and doesn't have a degradation problem like analog.
Also, all HDMI signals carry both the video and the audio.

xVern wrote:
Strongest as the weakest link, right? Gold connectors dont mean anything when you have copper/nickel wire (ie. monster).

Gold connectors are better because they don't corrode, and are not susceptible to galvanic problems that may arise when dissimilar metals are in contact with each other, not because gold is a better conductor than copper (it isn't).

db

akronharry wrote:Dear Monster Cable,
I submitted a testimonial on your behalf regarding your overpriced crap .Please send me a 100 dollar gift card.

I too would like a $100 gift card from Bose as I enjoy using the overpriced soundsystem. Oh wait, that only causes their prices to go up.

Only reason I have it is because my uncle went out and pieced together a better set up. I'll take a Bose system for Free 99.

akronharry wrote:I'm sorry but my Monster Cables work great. While I spent some money on them I know I am getting top notch quality from a great company!!! I would rather spend the money up front now then keep buying inferior cables!

.
You sound like a sound investor type, so just for you (and this is a one time offer) I can get you a great deal on this bridge that is just outside my window. Two spans, only been driven across on Sundays by this little ole lady from Alameda. The island connecting the spans is extra though.

mbetush wrote:From my experience, the higher end HDMI cables are the best. I've had some problems with the el' cheapo brands, especially if I get two cables near each other or near other cables.

It could just be a problem with my equipment, but when I traded in quality cables the problem disappeared.

I don't even wanna get into the actual science of HDMI cables... let's just say that the difference in output is negligible. Pretty packaging and appearance costs a lot to develop as does marketing.

gauravarora22 wrote:Sorry to tell you guys .. but for the first time in 2 years ... woot's deal is not the best deal out there ..

here is a HDMI cable from amazon for $3.92 after tax+shipping ...

Uh, 12 feet is longer than 6 feet.

gauravarora22 wrote:Sorry to tell you guys .. but for the first time in 2 years ... woot's deal is not the best deal out there ..

here is a HDMI cable from amazon for $3.92 after tax+shipping ...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000AA2RCY/ref=oss_product

Yeah, except that one is only 6ft long, not a 2-pack, and only HDMI version 1.3a. You're right! They're exactly the same! LOLZ @ UR FACE!

Costner wrote:
Fair deal - and it bears repeating that a digital signal is a digital signal (for all intents and purposes), so these will work just as well as anything which costs exponentially more.

Yes and no. Digital signals are sent over these cables in an analog form. Interference and signal degradation can still play a role. Yes it's digital at both ends, but you can still run into problems if the signal gets messed up enough to cause issues with that signal level is considered on or off (1 or 0). Otherwise, HDMI cable length limitations wouldn't vary so greatly depending on cable conductor (28 awg vs 24 awg, etc.).

With that said, I haven't read up on any studies to know what the real world differences in performance are (if any) between the various cable sources and quality. So for the majority of purposes, the money saved on cheap cables might well be worth it. And obviously running out to Best Buy to buy a $90 HDMI cable is never worthwhile.

After reading all the posts, and all the info, my head was spinning so bad I bought two and don't even need them. My head hurts...I gotta go take a nap. Dam u woot!!!!

dbcooper wrote:Gold connectors are better because they don't corrode, and are not susceptible to galvanic problems that may arise when dissimilar metals are in contact with each other, not because gold is a better conductor than copper (it isn't).

db

And, since gold is the most malleable of metals, it makes a better contact as it can reform to make a closer fit.

toby4408 wrote:I live in Texas so I must pay sales tax. Normally it's 8.25%. Why does WOOT charge ~14.5% sales tax?? Are they also taxing the shipping fee?

Yes, Texas charges sales tax on shipping of taxable goods.

Texas Sales Tax
Frequently Asked Questions
Sales Tax Collection

timmyd24601 wrote:Most people don't know what HDMI actually stands for...

Haphazardly Developed Mostly Intermittent

Another Sony product being shoved down our throats, HDMI can not beat a nice set of component video cables...

timmyd24601 wrote:Because you get superior service... As somebody who works in a locally owned "brick and mortar" store, if you buy a cable from us and it doesn't work, we replace it...

Yeah, "superior service" from someone who isn't smart enough to know and explain correctly to their customers why (digital) HDMI is preferable to component video (especially as cable lengths get longer) and instead quotes inane "meanings" for HDMI.

Superior service, timmy? NOT!

So many points have I.

• HDMI is digital, both the video and audio sections of it. The mention of "degradation" of a digital signal over 12' of HDMI wire is crazy talk unless you simply have really crappy connections or are trying to set up an entertainment center next to a generator at the power plant. Assuming a solid mating connection at the HDMI plugs and assuming the cable was assembled properly, there's either a signal or there's not a signal.
  
• There's no difference in the signal you get over a fiber-optic cable and an HDMI or other wired digital audio connection.
  
• Supporting 220Hz or 440Hz to these connections is similar to a car being able to do 5 or 10mph... if those refresh rates had anything to do with the signal coming across the HDMI wire, which they don't. Refresh rate is up to the display device, not the equipment sending the information to display.
  

dbcooper wrote:
Gold connectors are better because they don't corrode, and are not susceptible to galvanic problems that may arise when dissimilar metals are in contact with each other, not because gold is a better conductor than copper (it isn't).

db

raelalt wrote:And, since gold is the most malleable of metals, it makes a better contact as it can reform to make a closer fit.

AND, because it is the most malleable of metals (I think mercury and possibly lead may be more malleable), it also wears out faster. So if you connect and disconnect a lot (like in a patch bay application) gold connectors may not be your friend.


db

Leakfrogs 2 for 20 at Buy.com

treedweller wrote:Oh, sure, these will work, but to really get the best results you need to disassemble your electronics and solder them together directly. Then you build a lead-lined entertainment center to block any outside interference. Anyone who doesn't do this may as well go get a 1950's B&W TV and hook it up to rabbit ears. You just don't understand what it means to be a true technophile.

You may want a lead shield, if you often get a high neutron flux, or excessive xrays into your entertainment center. For electromagnetic shielding at lower wavelengths, silver linings work best, but are too expensive. For home use, I would recommend a thick walled, welded aluminum box, with copper plated connectors for all of the seals.

Of course, with HDMI, you probably won't need any of that. If the picture looks good, and the sound, sounds good, then it is good. It won't degrade over time.

I've always wondered about the "quality" thing when it comes to HDMI cables...

When I needed to run cable from the PS3 in the living room to the flatscreen in the bedroom, I couldn't afford the moolah for a "quality" HDMI cable at the insane length I needed. So I went to everyone's favorite auction site and bought a cheapo 40' cable from Hong Kong for about fifteen bucks.

I was expecting some signal degradation because, duh, cheap cable + really long length = not so good.

Guess what? I can't tell the difference. The absurdly long cable running through the basement produces picture that looks EXACTLY THE SAME as the picture from the 6' cable I bought from Best Buy for three times as much.

My house is now crisscrossed with really long HDMI (and ethernet) cables running through the basement from various devices over to various TVs and I've never had a single problem. No signal degradation, or if it's there it's too slight for me to notice when staring at the "good" vs "cheap" cable pictures side-by-side. No dead cables, no fraying, no difference.

And if one of my cheap cables does ever have a problem, I'll be out a whole fifteen bucks for a new one.

As a gamer chick who spends a lot of time on forums where people argue over the huge quality difference between 75 FPS and 100 FPS... I think that sometimes we tech-think ourselves into a fugue where the numbers and specifications and frames\rates\hertz\signals take on an importance that doesn't really exist, and we forget that even though there may well be a difference in quality between one thing and the next, if the human eye can't discern it, it doesn't matter.

overdoer wrote:As a brick & mortar guy, I'll openly tell people that most will not "see" a difference between cheap & expensive cables. That said, I'd rather have the 240/480 hz cables if I can afford them. Yes, the audioholics site does a great job debunking myths about HDMI cables, but it makes one mistake: the "hertz" rating has nothing to do with bandwith. Bandwidth just determines how much information can be contained per packet, not per second. Faster HDMI cables--10.2 gbps, 14.3 gbps, up to 17.8 gbps--move these packets along faster, hence the increased frame rate capabilities. Yes, the device only provides a 60hz signal, but if the TV can't pull those packets faster than 60hz, all you will see is a 60hz picture. If you have a 600hz plasma, your "ideal" cable is something rated 240/480hz at the moment. That said, most people will not be able to tell the difference. Resolution, color, brightness, hue, saturation - no difference (thank you digital signal). Motion will be the biggest difference...you'll have slightly less blur on fast-moving scenes, and less "perceived" lag in video games with higher rated cables. Is Monster expensive? Of course. Is it worth it? Not unless you're super picky and don't feel like shopping around. Result? If you're shopping here on Woot anyways - buy these cables, duh. If you come talk to me in a brick & mortar store, I'll tell you which cables are technically superior. The choice is yours.

Wow, what in the world are you talking about? Please let us know the name of your store so we can steer our friends and family away from shopping there. There's no such thing as a 60hz source signal. It's defined by the HD resolution-- in frames per second. The amount of data your TV is getting has NOTHING to do with the refresh rate of the TV. If the HDMI cable is working, your TV is receiving 30 or 60 frames of data per second. (maybe 120 if it's doing 3D). The TV then does all the work converting that signal to whatever refresh rate the panel is working at.

If the TV wasn't getting enough data fast enough, your image would be breaking up. Period. It's not going to look smoother because you're running a "faster" cable.

http://www.tvlampsnbulbs.com/2009/03/what-does-600hz-subfield-motion-mean/

http://www.tvlampsnbulbs.com/2009/08/120hz-vs-600hz-which-is-better/

timmyd24601 wrote:Most people don't know what HDMI actually stands for...

Haphazardly Developed Mostly Intermittent

Another Sony product being shoved down our throats, HDMI can not beat a nice set of component video cables...

Are you kidding? When it comes to audio, analog rules. Video? It's awful. DVI and HDMI are absolute godsends. Especially for larger home theaters with longer runs? Groundloops, noise, fuzz, all a thing of the past. Said as someone that has a Lexicon MC12b sitting in the closet BECAUSE it only does component and I got tired of switching HDMI separately. And 'cause the Halcro sounds better.

As for cable quality? Standards? HDMI is HDMI. Yes the cheapest cables at longer lengths won't do 1080p without artifacts. But under 15'? Anything will work. Better cables get you heavier connectors, thicker wiring, etc. Given HDMI isn't a locking plug? That's BAD 'cause it means they wiggle free more easily. In this case? Cheaper really is better so long as the signal integrity is there. How do you know the signal integrity is there? You see a picture or you don't. If it's marginal? You'll see a BUNCH of noise. But no HDMI cable can make things 'clearer' just as no Ethernet cable can make your internet faster. At best, what you put down the pipe is what you get out.

Oh yeah: In for 3. Monoprice is great, but I've gotten too many dud cables from 'em.