joe277 wrote:I do know, though, that different quality cables may transmit a signal differently. A poorly constructed cable may degrade the signal quality so that at the other end of the cable you are not receiving the same signal that was originally put in. This is less prevalent in shorter length cables, but should always be a consideration.
This is true, however the end result is totally different with a digital signal versus an analog signal. Distortion or interference in an analog signal changes the sound and/or picture being transmitted (ghosts on a NTSC TV channel e.g.). But with a digital signal it's either 100% or 0%. At whatever point the interference garbles the digital bits so much that they can't be corrected you lose both the audio and video - period.
Take that NTSC channel with ghosting - if you get that on a digital (ATSC) channel then you'll either see a perfect picture with perfect audio or you won't see anything depending on how bad the multipath is.
joe277 wrote:
Your example of the Ethernet cable is misused.
a better quality Ethernet and COAX cable should better transmit the original signal better and more reliably.
Actually it is similar in that the ethernet cable is digital and either works or doesn't work but it doesn't change what is transmitted. But you said the magic words - transmit the original signal more reliably. That's all the cable can do - ensure you get a signal where you otherwise might not due to signal loss or interference. If you get a reliable signal with a $10 cable then there won't be any difference with a $100 cable. You're confusing analog principles with digital principles - apples and oranges.
joe277 wrote:
Whether or not the Vizionware cables would improve these numbers is something for someone with the proper equipment to test.
I do agree with you about the cables shouldn't be able to improve the contrast and black levels, but the Vizionware cables supposedly boost the signal
As akirby points out and your posts suggest as much this is all about long runs. A booster is part of that and equalization is just as important which I don't know if they include that but for most new 2007 DVI equipped sources auto EQ is part and parcel of the chip used.
Poor digital connectivity can create artifacts as both video and audio error correction systems are not based on recovering the original data but on generating new data to fill in what is missing. The obvious errors we see and hear is when the data stream is so poor the error correction can't even make it up anymore...
It's snake oil for the most part unless the run is long, typically over 30 feet for DVI or HDMI, and in that case don't use connection adapters either; get a custom cable terminated with the connectors you need.
This I can tell you; differences in wire are extremely difficult if not impossible to measure for the most part and they can claim better contrast ratios all they want, it won't show up with a pattern generator and test equipment!
I'm currently trying to do more research on the subject. Haven't found much other than people disagree. I have found that most people seem to agree on the fact that longer lengths of digital cables will degrade the signal (it loses part of the signal). With this in mind... I am still not convinced that with a poorly constructed you wouldn't have the same degradation of the signal. Either way, as an installer I give the customer the choice of cable. I do not pressure them. Most customers would rather have the piece of mind with using a quality cable with a lifetime warranty and is rated for tomorrows bigger bandwidth needs. Some of those customers do notice a difference immediately (or in a blind test) while others do not. If you can point me in the direction of some technical specs or tests it would be appreciated. Thanks.
You have a point but I can tell from analog testing experience that when you reach less than one foot you can get away with a lot of technical error and not note a difference. With HDMI that would be different to an extent but similar in most applications. From that experience I would say after about 9-10 feet you better get the good stuff. It doesn't have to be expensive, just meet specs. After 30 feet you are in expensive territory period due to construction and better conduction materials. Another rule of thumb for me is if it is going in a wall you go with the good stuff because it is not going to be changed out easily if at all.
VivaCali wrote:Also, am I correct in assuming that you don't connect your audio through the VP50?
Two different questions (one in the title and another in the body of the message). I'm not sure which one you want answered so I'll briefly tackle both.
No, I don't pass my audio through the VP50 since it is in the chain after the AVR/pre-pro. There were a couple of issues in that regard (HDMI audio) with the VP30 which is one of the reasons I upgraded to the VP50. The VP50 added a host of additional features that made it attractive to me (see the DVDO web site for differences.) Interestingly, I could have taken advantage of a fairly attractive VP30 to VP50 upgrade offer from DVDO at the time but I found that the VP30 still had a lot of use to me in my secondary (bedroom) set-up, especially since my Pioneer Plasma (720p, really 768) benefits from custom scaling via the VP30. Interestingly, the only problem I have with the VP30 now upstairs is trying to get HDMI digital audio to work when directly connected to the display. I have to switch to analog audio to avoid a loud buzzing sound. If I connect the one source affected (Dish 722 DVR via HDMI) directly to the display (VP30 out of the loop) the digital audio works fine so it's not the TV nor the 722).
BTW, I didn't upgrade from a VP50 to the new VP50-pro because I didn't think the additional features offered me much that would actually improve my situation at this point. If I had no VP at all and was looking for a unit I would go with the VP50-pro but as an upgrade path it just wasn't attractive to me, but might be for others.
I don't know if it's to late to respond to this posting, but here goes.
I am considering the DVDO VP50, but I am wondering how much it might improve my picture. My equip consists of Panny 50PF9UK, Onkyo SR705, Tivo hr10-250(ota use), Directv hr20-700, and Toshiba A2. I currently use the Onkyo to switch all HDMI sources. I do not know how good the VP is in the Onkyo or if the Panny is good at de-interlacing. I watch sports, movies and some network shows. My thought is to purchase the VP50 to output 1080p to plasma and optical cable to Onkyo for audio.
It's hard to say without actually seeing how all your equipment performs currently. There are so many variables involved that a blanket statement just doesn't cover it all sufficiently in my opinion.
Generally speaking, I have found an external video processor contains better video processing circuitry (and more options) than any VP found in displays or AVRs (unless you are talking about the very top of the line AVRs which cost more than the VPs). Therefore you should see better results.
However, if it is at all possible to audition the VP50 in your home (in a try and buy scenario) this would be the absolute best way to see if it meets your needs. All you would be out are possibly some shipping costs (if the dealer or the manufacturer supports this concept) and it might be money well spent.
