|
|
Posted by JerrySmith'sTightEnd on 11/09/06 02:01
"Guest" <llcoolj@comcast.com> wrote in message
news:11s4h.1084$GS2.1008@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
> JerrySmith'sTightEnd wrote:
>> You are absolutely, positively full of shit.
>
> Name calling is not needed.
Jeez, I'm not name calling. If I was doing that, I'd call you a pretentious
fool. Instead, I merely (and correctly) pointed out that you are full of
shit.
>Go buy some and experiment. You should find the same results. I like AR
>cables as their cables seem to have the right balance from the start. You
>tell me that I am full of shit, but yet you have no evidence to support
>this. I think you are going by paper specs and not real world tests. Mine
>was real world. I am glad that I made the move.
Yours is a subjective test colored by your preference for AR cables. I'm
going by that simple thing called "science." Unless you are losing bits,
different digital cables make ZERO difference. A cable does not actively
process or alter the signal.
>
> If you are not used to dealing with high resolution video in it's purist
> form and only came aboard recently, then your eye for spotting resolutions
> and details may not be as sharp as others. I have been dealing with
> high-res video since 1990. I had the Laserdisc, S-VHS VCR, various DVD
> players and HD. I know what the deal is.
Now you're comparing apples and oranges if you're talking about hi res 90's
era video, since the signal was analog and subject to nuances due to
reflection, filtering and other factors.
>
> I am one of few who pointed out that the origianl Bruce Lee collection
> from 20th Century Fox was a Laserdisc transfer(You can see my review on
> Amazon) as they cannot pull one over on me. If you are one of those fools
> who had a SD Sony TV thinking that they were getting true high-res, then
> we can end it right here. You do realize that SOny never disclosed their
> lines of resolution right? They were the only brand that I could think of
> who actually lied about what the TV could do.
Whoop de fucking dooo. Now I will go out on a limb and say you're a
pretentious fool.
>
> My point in going there is, I know what I am taking about and I know what
> I am seeing. If I did not see it, I would be thinking about what to do
> with this cable. Get one a look a few films you have seen so many times
> that you know where everything is and what it all looks like. If you
> notice something else, you know it is better. I just tried it on old
> films from the 70's and early 90's, but I did not stick in Revenge of the
> Sith yet. I will do that see what's up. There is no need for me to lie.
> I am a skeptic as you are.
Once again, you fucking idiot, as long as you're not losing bits (or
distorting the signal so much it effectively causes the decoder to lose
bits) with a digital signal, THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE.
>
>>
>>
>> "Guest" <llcoolj@comcast.com> wrote in message
>> news:rOp4h.10871$r12.5725@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have read over the last few years about HDMI/DVI cables being all
>> the same regardless of build quality because "ones and zeros are ones
>> and zeros. It either works or it does not." This type of reasoning
>> makes sense on it's face, but then I recalled having a Monster Cable
>> optical cable and then an Acoustic Research optical cable and I
>> noticed a very big difference in sound quality. The AR outperformed
>> the Monster to a very larger degree.
>> I previously had a HDMI-DVI cable (generic) and I did not think
>> anything of it. Then I got an LCD and the HDMI cable from the pack
>> of a Panny DVD player. I noticed an improvement over the DVI, but I
>> am sure it is because I had gone from a CRT to an LCD.
>>
>> In my mind, I had always been curious as to trying out a better HDMI
>> cable. You people on the net insist that it cannot get any better an
>> that generic HDMI cable was all that was needed. Then I kept
>> thinking: "If these cables are the same, higher quality parts and
>> wire should allow for some improvement in the cables." I mean,
>> thicker cables, better metals and even gold plated connectors should
>> make a large difference. So I had to investigate this, which I did.
>>
>> I ended up getting a used AR PRII(or something like that. Their
>> second from the top cable) which was thick, gold plated and very
>> stiff. I thought with all of this extra build, it must offer
>> something better. So I plugged it in and immediately I noticed film
>> grain that I had never seen before(on a movie I watch a good 500
>> times, Shaft, 1971), details that I had never seen before, a smoother
>> and clearer picture as well.
>> I know the film grain and streaks may not be a good thing, but at
>> least I see what was missing and that is a clue to let me know that I
>> am seeing more detail. I can now clearly see clothing material
>> patterns like never before. I can clearly make out individual hairs
>> and fur seems to be so clean that I could touch it. The contrast has
>> improved. In fact, it improved so much I had to lower it on my
>> player. Jewelry now looks clearly like metal. I even noticed dust
>> on a glass that I had never noticed before. The best thing is, now
>> my unconverted DVD's no longer look unconverted. It now looks like
>> straight HD! I see more film grain and scratches along with other
>> film artifacts which makes(at least older films anyway) look as if
>> you are watching it from the projector!
>> I know, some of you may think that I am taking it too far, but I
>> clearly see the difference. So a high quality cable does make a
>> difference. No more generic for me. HOWEVER, I would never pay
>> retail for one either. Go on Ebay and get a used joint or a new one
>> if possible and save big money. Also let you in on a little known
>> secret - AR cables a WAAAY better than Monster for about half the
>> price. Also, Radio Shack analogs (I never tried their digital) are
>> better than Monster's all but absolute top of the line cables also.
>
> --
> This post is Sponsored by: www.overheadsoft.com
>
> http://www.linkreferral.com/cgi-bin/linkreferal/adwel.cgi?oldrefid=20013
>
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|