HDMI Question

[doomey!]

Being HDMI has a digital output, would I be right in assumign better cables (for hdmi) would not make a spot of difference?

Same question for optical elads.

[WoWo]

Depends, in terms of the picture quality then it is correct that there is little or no difference in quality between a cheap cable and an expensive one. The quality issue is generally down to interference which is not an issue with digital (you either get it or you don't).

But a quality cable is more likely to last longer and be less prone to total failure. Having said that unless you are doing some very iffy things with them I can imagine a cheaper cable would fail and certainly not in any sort of time scale which would make it financially inferior.

My limited experience of Opticals would be the same however the cables I have had tended to be a bit flimsy and a better stronger cable might be a better long term option.

[WoWo]

Thats should of course be "I can't imagine"

[doomey!]

Thanks for the reposnse.
I should not be gettign any interference as my connection is direct. :)
So basically premium cables are awaste of money.
For example monster which is meant to be qaulity cables anyway, do three hdmi options..its just nonesense to me.. lol

[vehelpfulguy]

If you have a number of devices connected together to supply your TV then no doubt you have a lot of cables (mains, HDMI, maybe scart, cables to speakers etc).

These cables are often near each other and can cause interference.

The better cables usually have better insulation and can withstand this interference.

I had two cheap Scart cables connecting my Sky box to my DVD Recorder and then from my DVD recorder to my TV (all digital) and they were running near each other and near the mains cables.

I was getting interference on my TV so bought two decent Scart cables for about �15 each and got a much better picture.

I am not saying pay �75 for a cable but low end Scart and HDMI cables can make your TV signal worse.