High-Def Cables Get Smarter

businessweek.com ^ | May 28, 2009 | Cliff Edwards

[Las Vegas Dave]

Is it time to throw out your HDTV and home theater equipment? Consumer eletronics makers sure hope so. The consortium of companies that help create the standard for high-definition multimedia interface (HDMI) cables just announced a new specification, called HDMI 1.4, that could further reduce cable clutter. For the uninitiated, HDMI has quickly become the preferred method for transmitting video and audio from a set-top box to a television. Users need only one cable instead of two or more required of older analog TV sets. The new HDMI 1.4 cables, which should become available early next year, add an Ethernet channel that will let two connected devices such as an HDTV and game console share an Internet link (meaning you don’t have to connect each and every device in your home wirelessly or via its own Ethernet cable). The new spec also increases its data exchange rate in the event that data-intensive 3-D televisions take off, and add a neat feature in which new HDMI cables will automatically optimize a TV’s picture based on content types. The catch? The new features in the HDMI 1.4 cables will work only with HDTVs and set-top boxes that go on sale beginning late this year. That means many of us in the installed base of 1 billion devices will either have to make do with what we have until our current equipment conks out.

[AceMineral]

Wharfedale.

[TomGuy]

I’ve tried to stay analog. I’m forced into digital for TV

I tried to stay analog, but the old TV quit, so I splurged.

The DTV has a good picture. My DVR is still analog, but I only use it to record non-HD programs to watch/erase.

Cox Cable is still feeding analog, but even on the DTV many of their analog (basic/extended) programs are 'in the box' -- black space above and below. I know their intention is to force viewers into their digital service, even though they claim that is how they get the feeds from the source. FX, which is nearly always in the box, advertises itself as a no-box channel. Who, then puts it in the box? FX or Cox? Ironically, the digital channels (local) are full screen, even when the corresponding analog feed is 'in the box'.

I just up the zoom. It cuts out some of the peripheral areas, but is watchable. I have considered upgrading to digital just to get HD, but Cox's "free" HD programming will cost an extra $20 per month ($13 for digital plus $6 for HD tuner plus tax). So far, it isn't worth it, and especially with summer reruns, etc.

[holden]

To each his own, right?

Yeah, I would say to each his own, but that's not what the RIAA and MPAA are into. They don't want you to be able to have control over media you may have purchased licensed. You'll be sued, fined or imprisoned for taking out the bad words out of videos you might want otherwise to let your kids see and hear. You're not allowed to copy DVDs onto a media server in your own home; that's inherently a DMCA violation. $250,000 fine for each occurence, bub.

These manufacturers are looking for power, control and money. They look to the horizon at technology they didn't invent and try to find a proprietary, protectable way of aggregating/integrating such technology into a connector, a cable, a set of wires or a device that the whole waterfront of customers (or installers) will say, "Yeah, that's cool! I'll buy and use that and junk what I bought just three years ago."

They want to be like RCA, where the world will be so enamored of their required, gatekeeper widget that they and their grandkids can retire to the beach collecting royalties. If they were like Thomas Edison and really developed a ground-breaking technology, this would be reasonable, but we live in an each where Edison's plumber wants in on ole Thomas' lucrative money stream and has set up a toll booth on his driveway for you to pay him $0.50 every time someone wants to build a light receptacle into a new lamp design.

Though many line up to pay the plumber (picture the "Back to the Future," alternate-reality Biff-with-Marty's-mom-as-sextoy becoming a filthy rich boor) and his fee, some bright guys think it nonsense, just as freepers see it for the inappropriately-placed, outlandish, insensitive-to-the-customer's-needs technogreed it is. There are dozens of would-be hangers-on to the video and audio chains that we purchase today. They've lawyered up decades ago. They're ready to sue other new guys looking to jump up, whether frivolously or not, because that's what money can do--sue.

Technology without the time-honored revenue stream is vulnerable. You won't hear about truly groundbreaking stuff unless it finds sufficient money to get into the marketing game in a big way, like Blu-Ray. "Stand back! Wait for it, wait for it, wait for it. You're not getting this until we have perfected the bulletproof (HA!) toll booth (AACS)!"

Even Microsoft's tech and money betting on HD-DVD couldn't overcome the anti-capitalist thugs' of Hollywood resistance to them horning in on their game.

It's as depressing as what Obama is in the process of foisting upon us. It threatens to keep us "enthralled" for decades (think 1917-1989).

HF

[lentulusgracchus]

I sold stereo equipment years ago, back in the days of early four-channel, Dolby "B" and "matrix" 4-channel. Those reel-to-reel decks were the way to go for fidelity, next to top-end turntables. And while I didn't sell Akai, I knew they had a good reputation as damn near bulletproof. Sony, Akai, TEAC. Wollensak was good, too -- I have a big old Wollensak cassette recorder with ferrite heads. Needs service, of course.

[Right Wing Assault]

That means many of us in the installed base of 1 billion devices will either have to make do with what we have until our current equipment conks out.

OR what?

[lentulusgracchus]

Cox Cable

There's your problem, right there.

Cable companies are fundamentally, intrisically, and ontologically eeeevillll ...... they lie, they lie, they lie.

Saw 'em coming years ago, never have had cable, except in one apartment where it was included w/ the rent. That was 40 years ago. If you're old enough, you can remember the big selling point about cable: "ad-free TV!" Suckers.

Saw a cable exec on Nightly Business Report 20 years ago, talking about recent rate increases (which were driving rapid stock gains as the hyenas horked down the people's money). The guy was repulsive, you could see the greed coming out of him like sweat-grease out of oversized pores on a hot day. He was talking like he had gravy running down his chin (which in a way, he was), and just lovin' it. Absolutely skin-crawlingly bad.

Dance with the devil, don't be surprised if you get screwed standing up.

[lentulusgracchus]

It's as depressing as what Obama is in the process of foisting upon us.

At least you'll be able to blow off a little steam each day, when Obama arranges for Rahm Emanuel to come on and lead you in your daily "Two Minutes Hate".

</Orwell>

[Poser]

I’ve still got my KLH Model 27 with a pair of AR15 speakers in my office.

[rlmorel]

LOL. I know what you mean. My wife and I are television luddites who don’t have cable (get an air signal) and still have a 12 year old CRT television. We do have all kinds of stuff glued together, Home theater, 2 vhs, dvd, converter box, etc. It is a rat’s nest.

The only thing that makes it manageable is the Harmony Remote...those things are frikking unbelievable. My wife thought I was completely whacked when I proposed spending $250 on a remote, but I think she gets it now.

She gave me the go-ahead last fall to spend $5000 on a new HDTV and systems, but after the election...she withdrew that offer.

I took too much time shopping to get it right. I should have struck while the iron was hot.

[Moonman62]

Something about smoothing out the signal I guess, gives it a warmer, less bright and harsh sound.

That's how audiophiles describe less accuracy. I could sell them used chewing gum for $500 an ounce if I tell them it will acoustically isolate their speakers.

[I Drive Too Fast]

My Pioneer SX-1980 still works. I bought it in Okinawa while in the USAF in 1979. It weighs 79 pounds. It pushes 270 watts per channel up to 4 speakers. Let's just say I know whay my hearing is bad.

As far as cables go, I bought the Monster 1000 HD HDMI cable. Any time the technology improves I can get the equivalent cable at no charge. I just return the old one and they send me an upgrade.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Thanks for the ping!!

Actually I have been waiting for one as I've wanted to ask you a question.

Is there any difference in picture quality with the higher priced HDMI cables?

I've seen price ranges on the HDMI 1.3, 6' from $4.50 on eBay to $200.00 elsewhere.

Is there any difference in picture quality, especially for Blue Ray?

[I Drive Too Fast]

I own an Akai GX -635-D 10” R2R. It does sound very good. I believe it was 1980 when I bought that one. I have a couple of 10 “ reels and a few of the smaller reels. The 10” will hold over 6 hours of music.

[Las Vegas Ron]

As far as cables go, I bought the Monster 1000 HD HDMI cable.

Is the cable worth the money?

I Googled it and see that it can go for as high as $200.00...then I look on eBay and you can buy them for around $30.00 in the original retail packaging from reputable sellers.

Makes me wonder about the price variation an what's up

[kinsman redeemer]

Okay... I'm onboard. But will there be a HDMI 1.4 to 300-ohm flat wire conversion connector so I can keep watching my Philco TV?

[I Drive Too Fast]

I have a 40" Sony XBR4 1080P tv and a "stoneaged" Sony Bluray player (the BDP-S300) and that is the one I use the monster cable on. I bought it for less than $100 total online. I bought 2 of them. I just use the cheap hdmi cable that came with my tivo HD recorder. Since I only listen to the tv's stereo speakers it is hard to tell if it is that much better. I bought it through a vendor on Amazons website. I think the cable was less than $80 each plus $8.00 shipping. I got the 2 meter one.

My surround system is downstairs on my Mitusbishi 55" tv with just a dvd player that is only a 5.1 system (7 speakers total). I figure I will go to a 7.1 system in the future and buy 2 more surround speakers, but I am in no hurry. All I know is that the picture on the bluray is very good. The tv speakers are adequate for me at this time.

[Las Vegas Ron]

Thanks. I'm using a cheap HDMI cable for Blue Ray but the picture is not as good as what I saw in the store when I bought the TV.

I us an optic cable for sound but am considering trying the Monster Cable to see if that improves the picture quality.

I see on eBay a couple of places you can get two 6' cables for less than $60.00 (in retail package)

[newfreep]

My office system includes vintage (shoebox sized) 1978 Rogers LS3/5A - designed by BBC as a true offsite monitor and remains a high-end performer even today. The original versions sell for upwards of $2k in Hong Kong....and I have no desire to replace. Amazing speakers for their frequency range.

Here's photo of the 60th anniversary edition in Rosewood (like mine) - amazing lifespan for a high-end audio product!

[Sans-Culotte]

This 1.4 HDMI cable is not earth-shaking news. The author is being absurd when he suggests, even jokingly, that we should throw out our current HDTV stuff. This cable appears to be perfectly compatible with current HDMI systems.

My stuff is all connected with HDMI 1.3 cables. I have a receiver with 4 HDMI inputs and one HDMI output. My Blu-ray player, HD DVD player, DISH DVR/Receiver and all-region Standard DVD player are all connected to the receiver via one Mediabridge HDMI 1.3 cable per component, and the receiver outputs to my HDTV with one HDMI cable. I have not need of audio cable as the HDMI carries both HD video and audio to the receiver.

The advantage of HDMI 1.4 will be for people who connect their components to the internet. My Blu-ray player can connect, but I do not need the online "Blu-ray Live!" crap, so I do not bother connecting. However, someone who does connect their Blu-ray to the internet, or who streams Netflix via the internet, or plays games online via a game console which connects to the internet will apparently have a simpler time of it with the HDMI 1.4 cables.

So, it's all good. If you've already got HDMI 1.3 stuff, you don't have to get rid of anything, or even upgrade if you don't want to. If you do upgrade, you are only going to need the cables. And I am sure Mediabridge or Monoprice will be offering some affordable versions of 1.4 as they do 1.3. No need to waste money on Monster cables.

[Las Vegas Dave]

Ron,

inexpensive HDMI cables work fine, I have some cheapo’s that came free with my HD DVD player and a cheap Sony DVD player that both work to my satisfaction.

When I bought my first HDTV I went to BestBuy and saw what they wanted for HDMI monster cables, then I drove to Wal-Mart and bought the 6ft Phillips HDMI cable for around $25, AND it has gold contacts!

Someone told me that all the cables really do is pass 0’s and 1’s (digital signals). And I am happy with the Phillip’s!!