Jeremy "UncleHoot" Praay wrote:
> Since HDMI is a digital connection, any cable capable of handling a 1080p 
> connection (Blu-Ray) is good enough right?

You want few errors. How many errors you actually get depends on your 
environment and your cable length.

> In the digital realm, anything capable of handling the signal 
> should be as good as any other, 

Remember that cables don't carry digital signals. They carry analog signals 
that your equipment interprets as digital values. The cable has to not 
degrade the signal enough that *your* end equipment can still understand the 
digital values. You can't hook the cable up to laboratory-quality test 
equipment and say "Yep, no errors."

Which is not to say cheap cables aren't sufficient. It's merely to say that 
cheap cables aren't necessarily sufficient just because it's digital.

It's the same reason you can only get ADSL service at certain distances from 
the telco CO. It's an analog signal. It's only digital once it gets inside 
your computer.

> Finally, 120Hz LCD.  I suppose in the future, we may have a 120Hz signal 
> from a Blu-Ray (or whatever), but currently 60Hz is the max.  So, you're 
> still transmitting a 60Hz signal into a 120Hz TV, so I don't see how a 
> better quality cable would help there either.  

It wouldn't, unless you're actually getting bit errors.

> In fact, I'm still not 
> convinced that 120Hz LCD makes any sense whatsoever. 

Understand that there's a processor inside the TV that's interpolating 
frames. It's not just painting the same frame twice. It's actually drawing 
something different every frame, based on the motion vectors in the image.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The question in today's corporate environment is not
   so much "what color is your parachute?" as it is
   "what color is your nose?"

Post a reply to this message