When 30 inches isn't enough .. or my kids are spoilt rotten!

[Amen-Moses]

I can't work out how to get iWeb to not scale down the photos but here are some shots of my youngest son playing WoW on my new 42 inch LCD TV.

http://web.mac.com/cds_computing/iWeb/Site 2/Photos 2_files/IMG_5527.jpg

http://web.mac.com/cds_computing/iWeb/Site 2/Photos 2_files/IMG_5524.jpg

This is using a high end PC as the 1950 Gfx card does the game justice but usually my Mac Mini (PPC 1.42Ghz) is hooked up to it.

The text on screen is as clear as a bell (using a middle quality DVI to HDMI cable) and the colours are fabulous, the photos don't really convey this but if anyone is interested in it I'll try to figure a way of putting up a full resolution picture.

btw, I also have a PS3 hooked up to this beauty and the full HDMI (1920x1080) display from that (admittedly using the most expensive HDMI cable you can buy!) is amazing.

Amen-Moses

 

[Amen-Moses]

If anyone is interested in one of these TVs you may be happy to learn that OS X 10.4.9 recognises the Sharp and correctly sets the output signal to drive it at full resolution.

Oh and Vista doesn't, just in case you were wondering.

Amen-Moses

 

[Kash]

Not to burst your bubble there, but you wasted a lot of money on cables. HDMI/DVI are digital signals, so a $100 cable is essentially the same as a $20 cable. You're only paying extra for the brand name, not an increase in picture quality. You could have saved a bundle by going with Apple's good quality but very affordable HDMI cable

Oh, and nice TV :black:

 

[cwa107]

Not to burst your bubble there, but you wasted a lot of money on cables. HDMI/DVI are digital signals, so a $100 cable is essentially the same as a $20 cable. You're only paying extra for the brand name, not an increase in picture quality. You could have saved a bundle by going with Apple's good quality but very affordable HDMI cable

Oh, and nice TV :black:

Agreed, digital cables are digital cables, you either have a signal or you don't, there is no in between.

I just got a Sharp Aquos 37" from Costco (my first venture into HDTV) and someone at work tipped me off to Monoprice.com. I know it sounds too good to be true, but they have 6' HDMI cables for about $7.00 and they are of very high quality. I've ordered about a dozen cables from them now for both myself and family members and have not been disappointed with their service at all. It usually takes just a couple of days between the time I order and the time the cables are received (and this is really impressive considering they're going from CA to PA).

 

[Amen-Moses]

Not to burst your bubble there, but you wasted a lot of money on cables. HDMI/DVI are digital signals, so a $100 cable is essentially the same as a $20 cable. You're only paying extra for the brand name, not an increase in picture quality. You could have saved a bundle by going with Apple's good quality but very affordable HDMI cable

Oh, and nice TV :black:

The image using the top end Monster cable is far superior to the bog standard PS3 cable I got when I bought it, in fact the £99 HDMI<->HDMI cable from Monster is superior to the £50 DVI->HDMI cable from PureAV.

On a 720p signal you probably wouldn't see much difference but at 1080p it is very visable.

Digital signals are less susceptable to noise and interferance than analog ones but they are still susceptable, in addition digital signals are affected by the bandwidth of a cable just as much as analogue, low bandwidth results in poorly formed leading edges to the signal resulting in bit loss which the receiver must compensate for.

With 15 years in avionics there ain't much I don't know about electronic signal processing!

Amen-Moses

 

[cwa107]

The image using the top end Monster cable is far superior to the bog standard PS3 cable I got when I bought it, in fact the £99 HDMI<->HDMI cable from Monster is superior to the £50 DVI->HDMI cable from PureAV.

On a 720p signal you probably wouldn't see much difference but at 1080p it is very visable.

Digital signals are less susceptable to noise and interferance than analog ones but they are still susceptable, in addition digital signals are affected by the bandwidth of a cable just as much as analogue, low bandwidth results in poorly formed leading edges to the signal resulting in bit loss which the receiver must compensate for.

With 15 years in avionics there ain't much I don't know about electronic signal processing!

Amen-Moses

Interesting. I've spent quite a bit of time reading up on cables and this is the first argument I've seen for more expensive / "better" quality cables. I calibrated my set using one of the aforementioned generic, monoprice.com cables and Digital Video Essentials @ 1080i and didn't notice any of the degradation on test patterns that you've noted. Now granted, that's coming off of an upconverting DVD player and is NOT 1080p.

I don't doubt your expertise, but am just relating my experience.

 

[fleurya]

You make it sound as though you did this just for your kids. C'mon!!

Also, will you adopt me?

 

[The Turtle!]

as much as i hate WoW and everything it stands for...im so jealous its not even funny! lol

nice set up man!

and i second the "will you adopt me?" lol

 

[Amen-Moses]

Interesting. I've spent quite a bit of time reading up on cables and this is the first argument I've seen for more expensive / "better" quality cables. I calibrated my set using one of the aforementioned generic, monoprice.com cables and Digital Video Essentials @ 1080i and didn't notice any of the degradation on test patterns that you've noted. Now granted, that's coming off of an upconverting DVD player and is NOT 1080p.

I don't doubt your expertise, but am just relating my experience.

I was doubtful that it would make that much difference myself so I had the shop connect up a PS3 with the £100 Monster cable versus a £30 Philips one (both gold plated btw) so I could see the difference myself, it was quite marked anywhere there was very small text. With the cheaper cable the text almost looks like it has a slightly out of alignment shadow or echo behind it whereas with the Monster it was crisp and clean.

The DVI cable is not quite as bad as the cheaper HDMI cable but it is not as crisp as the Monster either and this goes the same for my 1950 Gfx PC and any of my Macs as a source so it isn't just a noisy Gfx card.

btw, the same thing goes for other cables that most people don't think twice about, it's no good having Gigabit Ethernet with poor spec cables, your network will just spend most of its time resending garbled packets, likewise Firewire cables and USB2, get the best you can afford. The interfaces can only make do with what you give them and will scale back the speed to match the cables.

Digital vidio signals are similar to digital audio signals, any missing data is just ignored or filled with neutral data, tiny scratches on CDs will result it drop-outs that you the listener will not be aware of but will not compromise the ability of it to play through because the CD player will fill in the gaps (big scratches otoh will defeat the best players). Digital video will likewise suffer drop-outs which the TV will attempt to fill in the missing data.

You can actually see this with Sky TV signals, as the weather gets worse (i.e he signal-noise ratio increases) the picture gradually degrades until it gets to the point that the receiver can no longer fill-in enough of the data to make sense of the signal when the picture will freeze completely, I can tell what the weather is doing out to sea south of me purely by viewing the Sky reception quality on my TV.

Amen-Moses

 

[Amen-Moses]

You make it sound as though you did this just for your kids. C'mon!!

Well I did it for me but I don't get a look in. Since buying this thing last week I've had hordes of kids around here (some of which I'm sure I didn't sire) queing up to play "Resistance - Fall of Man", "Virtua Fighter 5" and "Motor Storm".

My favourite so far is the Grand Turismo HD Demo, I am definitely going to get that when it comes out! The scenery is so good I keep crashing whilst admiring the views.

Amen-Moses

 

[technologist]

I was doubtful that it would make that much difference myself so I had the shop connect up a PS3 with the £100 Monster cable versus a £30 Philips one (both gold plated btw) so I could see the difference myself, it was quite marked anywhere there was very small text. With the cheaper cable the text almost looks like it has a slightly out of alignment shadow or echo behind it whereas with the Monster it was crisp and clean.

The DVI cable is not quite as bad as the cheaper HDMI cable but it is not as crisp as the Monster either and this goes the same for my 1950 Gfx PC and any of my Macs as a source so it isn't just a noisy Gfx card.

btw, the same thing goes for other cables that most people don't think twice about, it's no good having Gigabit Ethernet with poor spec cables, your network will just spend most of its time resending garbled packets, likewise Firewire cables and USB2, get the best you can afford. The interfaces can only make do with what you give them and will scale back the speed to match the cables.

Digital vidio signals are similar to digital audio signals, any missing data is just ignored or filled with neutral data, tiny scratches on CDs will result it drop-outs that you the listener will not be aware of but will not compromise the ability of it to play through because the CD player will fill in the gaps (big scratches otoh will defeat the best players). Digital video will likewise suffer drop-outs which the TV will attempt to fill in the missing data.

You can actually see this with Sky TV signals, as the weather gets worse (i.e he signal-noise ratio increases) the picture gradually degrades until it gets to the point that the receiver can no longer fill-in enough of the data to make sense of the signal when the picture will freeze completely, I can tell what the weather is doing out to sea south of me purely by viewing the Sky reception quality on my TV.

Amen-Moses

You're mixing totally different technologies.

The DVI protocol (called TMDS) doesn't have any facility for error correction the way CD players, ethernet networks, and satellite broadcasts do. If a DVI signal fails, then the TV and device don't try to "fill in" the missing or corrupted data. If you're right on the edge, you may see regions of artifacts -- essentially, "dead" areas on the image. It won't go fuzzy or dim, or "less crisp."

 

[Kash]

You're mixing totally different technologies.

The DVI protocol (called TMDS) doesn't have any facility for error correction the way CD players, ethernet networks, and satellite broadcasts do. If a DVI signal fails, then the TV and device don't try to "fill in" the missing or corrupted data. If you're right on the edge, you may see regions of artifacts -- essentially, "dead" areas on the image. It won't go fuzzy or dim, or "less crisp."

Exactly, digital signals don't work like analog signals. It's either on or its off. The only thing you have to worry about is whether the cable is properly shielded or not to prevent future wear and tear.

Also, gold connectors are also hyped up. They only improve quality when they're in contact with another gold connector. Last I checked, manufacturers don't put gold on their TV or other A/V equipment's inputs.

Finally, the "difference" that you saw was merely psychological, not technical. The text looked crisper because you WANTED it to look crisper, not because it was. Trust me, I've done the Monster vs. $20 generic HDMI test myself and neither myself nor anybody else can tell the difference (to prevent viewer bias, I conduct the test by swapping cables and not telling the viewer which one I'm using).

This is exactly the sort of mentality that lets Monster get away with selling its cables with such a ridiculous markup. You think it costs Monster more to make its cables compared to the generic brand? Maybe half a penny because they use slightly thicker plastic to make it seem like it's higher quality. The inside is exactly the same.

 

[Amen-Moses]

Exactly, digital signals don't work like analog signals. It's either on or its off. The only thing you have to worry about is whether the cable is properly shielded or not to prevent future wear and tear.

Also, gold connectors are also hyped up. They only improve quality when they're in contact with another gold connector. Last I checked, manufacturers don't put gold on their TV or other A/V equipment's inputs.

Finally, the "difference" that you saw was merely psychological, not technical. The text looked crisper because you WANTED it to look crisper, not because it was. Trust me, I've done the Monster vs. $20 generic HDMI test myself and neither myself nor anybody else can tell the difference (to prevent viewer bias, I conduct the test by swapping cables and not telling the viewer which one I'm using).

This is exactly the sort of mentality that lets Monster get away with selling its cables with such a ridiculous markup. You think it costs Monster more to make its cables compared to the generic brand? Maybe half a penny because they use slightly thicker plastic to make it seem like it's higher quality. The inside is exactly the same.

There is nothing psychological about it, if I plug in one cable the result is a poor picture if I plug in the other it is clear and crisp.

It is the exact same phenomena that means that one person can get 4Mps out of their telephone line and another can only get 1Mps, low bandwidth or noisy lines cannot provide the speed of transfer that cleaner or higher bandwith ones can.

As I said 15 years of military service in exactly this area informs me that the materials used in cables has an enormous impact on the signal processing.

Amen-Moses

 

[Amen-Moses]

You're mixing totally different technologies.

The DVI protocol (called TMDS) doesn't have any facility for error correction the way CD players, ethernet networks, and satellite broadcasts do. If a DVI signal fails, then the TV and device don't try to "fill in" the missing or corrupted data. If you're right on the edge, you may see regions of artifacts -- essentially, "dead" areas on the image. It won't go fuzzy or dim, or "less crisp."

So why is the DVI->HDMI cable so much poorer than the HDMI-<HDMI cable?

What exactly does the TV (or monitor) do with missing bits in the data? How do they deal with excess noise?

If you want to persuade me that they assume a perfect signal at all times then I'm afraid you are barking up the wrong tree because in todays world there are NO systems in existance that do such a thing. Noise is such an endemic thing that even INSIDE silicon chips they have noise suppression and correction circuits, heck almost 20% of the silicon in a typical microprocessor is dedicated to just such tasks!

Amen-Moses

 

[technologist]

So why is the DVI->HDMI cable so much poorer than the HDMI-<HDMI cable?

I can provide no technical explanation for this.

What exactly does the TV (or monitor) do with missing bits in the data? How do they deal with excess noise?[\QUOTE]Seriously...it doesn't.. Any noise in the data stream will either be displayed (as odd-colored pixels or lines) or rejected (The display will probably show some variation of "No signal.") There is no correction code in the data stream.

If you want to persuade me that they assume a perfect signal at all times then I'm afraid you are barking up the wrong tree because in todays world there are NO systems in existance that do such a thing. Noise is such an endemic thing that even INSIDE silicon chips they have noise suppression and correction circuits, heck almost 20% of the silicon in a typical microprocessor is dedicated to just such tasks!

Amen-Moses

True but irrelevant. Yes, there are some error-detection and suppression features at the analog signaling level, but so far as the data stream is concerned, any data is good data. There is no parity, no repetition, no error-correcting code of any kind included. If there is enough noise that the timing signal is interrupted, then the display will shut off and say, "No signal." If, by some wonder, the data is corrupted, but the timing signal still gets through, then those bad pixels will be drawn to the screen. There is no provision in the standard for the display to detect, much less "fill in" bad pixels. So you'd get a bad pixel for that refresh cycle.

Before you got enough errors to be noticeable, though, the timing (clock) would probably crap out first, since it's the most sensitive, and the display would go blank. "No signal." But it won't go blurry or fuzzy on you.

 

[Aptmunich]

Woah, war of the cables anyone?

 

[PunkRockTuba]

yea seriously, regardless about the cables, the picture quality is insane and I wish I had that tv at my house.