The cable in question that has made me quite cross is made by a company called AudioQuest. There are plenty of others that seem intent on overcharging for cables though, a quick search online and of Amazon’s “highest first” price sorting yields some amazing results. There’s a serious point here that goes beyond this one stupid example. There is no advantage to spending a lot of money on an HDMI cable. Look for the features you need and see if the cable supports them. Most HDMI cables that have been made since the standard existed support all of the key features of HDMI – look for “high speed” and you’re good to go for 4K video, Audio Return Channel (ARC) and 3D.
This does get said quite a bit online, but there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to spend very much at all on an HDMI cable. I’d say that $10 is too much, but it does depend on the length. If you need a very long run, it’s also worth remembering that you’ll be better off using HDMI over CAT6 adaptors. These allow you to send 1080p over Ethernet cable, cost a modest amount and can give you 100m length runs. Just don’t buy AudioQuest’s 40ft Ethernet cable, it costs nearly $8000.
Is there any argument for expensive HDMI cables at all? No, there really isn’t. A big part of the claims here are that HDMI cables need to be “special” to do a good job of audio. This is something I’ve heard claimed time and time again, it’s related to something called jitter. As of yet, no one has managed to actually convince me it really makes any difference.
AudioQuest says that it has a patent that allows it to polarises the insulation on the five primary signal pairs. It does have a patent, you can see it on the patent office website. Does it do what the company says? Who knows, it doesn’t really matter as any signal problems on HDMI are incredibly easy to spot, and incredibly rare.
If you do buy a $5 HDMI cable and there is anything wrong with it you’ll be able to tell straight away. For the most part, an HDMI cable that isn’t up to the job won’t do anything at all. You’ll get no picture on your TV and you’ll hear no audio. Sometimes, and I’ve only seen this a small number of times, you can get some very obvious interference on the picture, it will look like HD snow, like you used to get on a de-tuned analogue set, but in high definition. Again, it’s really obvious.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m all for capitalism, but I do also think it’s disingenuous to sell something which offers absolutely no advantage over any other cable at such a huge price. Is the AudioQuest cable well-made? I have no idea. It might be, but there is no amount of well-made that can come close to £13,500. A Ferarri costs more than a Ford Focus because it offers something different. It performs better, it looks better, it’s built from better materials. The $13,500 HDMI cable does the same job as a $5 cable, and there’s no reliable way to measure any advantage from using one.
Is there any argument for expensive HDMI cables at all? No, there really isn’t. A big part of the claims here are that HDMI cables need to be “special” to do a good job of audio. This is something I’ve heard claimed time and time again, it’s related to something called jitter. As of yet, no one has managed to actually convince me it really makes any difference.
AudioQuest says that it has a patent that allows it to polarises the insulation on the five primary signal pairs. It does have a patent, you can see it on the patent office website. Does it do what the company says? Who knows, it doesn’t really matter as any signal problems on HDMI are incredibly easy to spot, and incredibly rare.
If you do buy a $5 HDMI cable and there is anything wrong with it you’ll be able to tell straight away. For the most part, an HDMI cable that isn’t up to the job won’t do anything at all. You’ll get no picture on your TV and you’ll hear no audio. Sometimes, and I’ve only seen this a small number of times, you can get some very obvious interference on the picture, it will look like HD snow, like you used to get on a de-tuned analogue set, but in high definition. Again, it’s really obvious.
Don’t get me wrong here, I’m all for capitalism, but I do also think it’s disingenuous to sell something which offers absolutely no advantage over any other cable at such a huge price. Is the AudioQuest cable well-made? I have no idea. It might be, but there is no amount of well-made that can come close to £13,500. A Ferarri costs more than a Ford Focus because it offers something different. It performs better, it looks better, it’s built from better materials. The $13,500 HDMI cable does the same job as a $5 cable, and there’s no reliable way to measure any advantage from using one.
What’s the best thing I can say about overpriced cables? Well they result in some truly hilarious reviews on the websites of Beelike and Best Buy BBY -0.49% that you should check out if you’re ever in possession of some extra time, and in need of a laugh.
No comments:
Post a Comment