Guest
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:58:33 +1100, Trevor <trevor@home.net> wrote:
We went through all that days ago.
We went through all that days ago.
T
Trevor
Guest
On 17/01/2016 7:57 PM, felix wrote:
And you think it was a compliment!
Trevor.
And you think it was a compliment!
Trevor.
Guest
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 13:52:16 +0800, Clocky <notgonna@happen.com>
wrote:
Of course, he didn't say in what capacity he worked for this 'high
end' audio company. Tea lady perhaps? There has been relevantly few
such companies in Aus over the past few decades, so I wonder which one
it was?
wrote:
Of course, he didn't say in what capacity he worked for this 'high
end' audio company. Tea lady perhaps? There has been relevantly few
such companies in Aus over the past few decades, so I wonder which one
it was?
T
Trevor
Guest
On 17/01/2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
Yes he is a moron, however there *ARE* certainly differences between
cables of ALL types, including HDMI. The main difference is mechanical
construction affecting reliability. That usually means the cable either
works or doesn't. Plenty of cheap ones fail, and plenty of really
expensive ones are *massive* rip offs. (of course many dealers sell
cheap ones at high prices too) Also there ARE different HDMI versions
that not all HDMI cables manage. ie. some cheap cables do not allow for
ARC or 3D. And many cheap cables do of course. So to claim they are all
the same is simply wrong.
Trevor.
Yes he is a moron, however there *ARE* certainly differences between
cables of ALL types, including HDMI. The main difference is mechanical
construction affecting reliability. That usually means the cable either
works or doesn't. Plenty of cheap ones fail, and plenty of really
expensive ones are *massive* rip offs. (of course many dealers sell
cheap ones at high prices too) Also there ARE different HDMI versions
that not all HDMI cables manage. ie. some cheap cables do not allow for
ARC or 3D. And many cheap cables do of course. So to claim they are all
the same is simply wrong.
Trevor.
F
felix
Guest
On 18-January-2016 1:58 PM, Trevor wrote:
same to you asshole
and so now you agree with me. what an idiot!
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
same to you asshole
and so now you agree with me. what an idiot!
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
F
felix
Guest
On 18-January-2016 2:28 PM, felix wrote:
situations where cables are not being constantly removed and reconnected
btw ie. fixed installations
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
and.. your comments re construction re reliability are irrelevant in
situations where cables are not being constantly removed and reconnected
btw ie. fixed installations
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
F
felix
Guest
On 18-January-2016 4:52 PM, Clocky wrote:
still no answer about YOUR experience
and other 'numpties' like.. "music lovers, audiophiles, recording
studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts" apparently
if you don't even know the answer to that, there's no point in even
discussing
oh, so now it's 'of the same specification' is it..
yeah, keep talkin. saying it's so doesn't make it so. and STILL you
don't say what real practical experience you have with cables which
makes you such an expert. but actually, don't keep talkin. I'm done with
you..
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
On 18/01/2016 9:10 AM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 10:14 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 4:42 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 8:47 PM, keithr wrote:
On 17/01/2016 12:34 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:45 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je�us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two
different
brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as much
sense.
well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible
differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see them,
I can
only
assume you do not have equipment of sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause
Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality
materials and are not faulty in some way and of the same
length
should
produce the same result.
no, you are if you want to argue against what is well known
among
audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect quality
affects
audio/video quality
LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do
NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated).
Only reason you'd do that is because you're trolling, which
I'm
at the
point of being convinced is exactly what you've been doing
these
past
three weeks or so. Your opinions on everything are just
*too*
ridiculous to be for real.
Agreed.
you must be as stupid as he is
You're trolling
oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated?
no answer I see
I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at least
ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a
bearing on
performance.
You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals
differs
am I? what have I said that's wrong about digital signals? quote
please..
and you are applying analog signal principles to digital devices
and
connections.
so according to you, if I connect my Yamaha amp with a $2 HDMI
cable and
then with a $300 monster cable, I will see no difference. it's
not so.
you are aware that some HDMI cables can't handle 1080p for
example, I
suppose? but then.. I suppose not.
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/finding_right_cable.aspx
and here's more detail about HDMI cable standards and specs..
http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F
Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but they
don't
manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are suggesting
with
your silly nonsense.
the silly nonsense that HDMI can affect video and audio
performance?
that silly nonsense? well you're wrong.
So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.
I'm neither. but you're ignorant on this matter.
You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just
love,
they'd go broke without people like you.
Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.
(and I can confirm that is so)
Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who
was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio
performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.
(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for it)
From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since exploded. The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.
Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded strong and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.
Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.
More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound
tracks and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx
but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!
You can believe whatever scam you like,
because it isn't. I have just one question for you.. what
experience do
YOU PERSONALLY have with AV cables and decent AV equipment?
More then you obviously when you can't even grasp the basics of
digital signals.
you're avoiding the question. what testing have YOU personally done of
AV input/output cables? part of my working career was with a
manufacturer of hi end audio.
Which make your claims even more ludicrous.
still no answer about YOUR experience
and other 'numpties' like.. "music lovers, audiophiles, recording
studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts" apparently
if you don't even know the answer to that, there's no point in even
discussing
oh, so now it's 'of the same specification' is it..
yeah, keep talkin. saying it's so doesn't make it so. and STILL you
don't say what real practical experience you have with cables which
makes you such an expert. but actually, don't keep talkin. I'm done with
you..
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Guest
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:04:11 +1300, "~misfit~"
<shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
You're wasting your time trying to reason with him.
<shaun.at.pukekohe@gmail.com> wrote:
Once upon a time on usenet felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 1:28 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 09:45:10 +0800, Clocky <notgonna@happen.com
wrote:
On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix <me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two different
brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as much
sense.
well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see
them, I can only assume you do not have equipment of
sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause
Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality materials and are not faulty in some way and of the
same length should
produce the same result.
no, you are if you want to argue against what is well known
among audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect
quality affects audio/video quality
LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do
NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated). Only reason you'd do that is because you're
trolling, which I'm at the point of being convinced is exactly
what you've been doing these past three weeks or so. Your
opinions on everything are just *too* ridiculous to be for
real.
Agreed.
you must be as stupid as he is
You're trolling
oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated? I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at least
ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a bearing on
performance.
You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals differs and you are applying analog signal principles to
digital devices and connections.
Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but they
don't manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are
suggesting with your silly nonsense.
So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.
He's trolling. No longer any doubt about it as far I am concerned.
"Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may
characterize a post as trolling,
while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to
the discussion,
even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an
ad hominem attack,
suggesting a negative motivation."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
Perjorative? Ad hominem?
I recall you calling two people 'stupid' a couple of posts ago. It's up
there, in the quoted stuff.
You're wasting your time trying to reason with him.
F
felix
Guest
On 18-January-2016 4:29 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
he agreed that not all cables are the same. Clocky has been saying they are.
it has, what's your problem? apart from the obvious..
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
he agreed that not all cables are the same. Clocky has been saying they are.
it has, what's your problem? apart from the obvious..
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
Guest
On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:18:32 +0800, Clocky <notgonna@happen.com>
wrote:
True. Of course, he studiously ignore my *several* suggestions to take
screen shots using a media player on a PC. He went out of his way to
ignore that solution*
*photoshopping notwithstanding
wrote:
True. Of course, he studiously ignore my *several* suggestions to take
screen shots using a media player on a PC. He went out of his way to
ignore that solution*
*photoshopping notwithstanding
J
Jasen Betts
Guest
On 2016-01-18, felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
because there's more profit in overpriced cables
--
\_(ă)_
because there's more profit in overpriced cables
--
\_(ă)_
K
keithr
Guest
On 18/01/2016 4:59 PM, felix wrote:
Speaking as one who has had formal education in electronics and has
spent 50 odd years pushing all sorts of signals through all sorts of
cables, I say that you are talking through your arse.
On 18-January-2016 4:52 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 9:10 AM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 10:14 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 4:42 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 8:47 PM, keithr wrote:
On 17/01/2016 12:34 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:45 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je�us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two
different
brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as much
sense.
well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible
differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see them,
I can
only
assume you do not have equipment of sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause
Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality
materials and are not faulty in some way and of the same
length
should
produce the same result.
no, you are if you want to argue against what is well known
among
audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect quality
affects
audio/video quality
LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do
NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated).
Only reason you'd do that is because you're trolling, which
I'm
at the
point of being convinced is exactly what you've been doing
these
past
three weeks or so. Your opinions on everything are just
*too*
ridiculous to be for real.
Agreed.
you must be as stupid as he is
You're trolling
oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated?
no answer I see
I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at least
ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a
bearing on
performance.
You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals
differs
am I? what have I said that's wrong about digital signals? quote
please..
and you are applying analog signal principles to digital devices
and
connections.
so according to you, if I connect my Yamaha amp with a $2 HDMI
cable and
then with a $300 monster cable, I will see no difference. it's
not so.
you are aware that some HDMI cables can't handle 1080p for
example, I
suppose? but then.. I suppose not.
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/finding_right_cable.aspx
and here's more detail about HDMI cable standards and specs..
http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F
Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but they
don't
manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are suggesting
with
your silly nonsense.
the silly nonsense that HDMI can affect video and audio
performance?
that silly nonsense? well you're wrong.
So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.
I'm neither. but you're ignorant on this matter.
You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just
love,
they'd go broke without people like you.
Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.
(and I can confirm that is so)
Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who
was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio
performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.
(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for it)
From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since exploded. The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.
Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded strong and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.
Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.
More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound
tracks and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx
but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!
You can believe whatever scam you like,
because it isn't. I have just one question for you.. what
experience do
YOU PERSONALLY have with AV cables and decent AV equipment?
More then you obviously when you can't even grasp the basics of
digital signals.
you're avoiding the question. what testing have YOU personally done of
AV input/output cables? part of my working career was with a
manufacturer of hi end audio.
Which make your claims even more ludicrous.
still no answer about YOUR experience
why do you think at trade shows they DON'T use cheap cables if it
makes no difference?
Gross profit is why. Selling overpriced cables to numpties like you is
big business.
and other 'numpties' like.. "music lovers, audiophiles, recording
studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts" apparently
but read this and understand why what you think you see is impossible
with HDMI.
http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/
http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F
You still don't get it. There are different cables supporting
different data rates and features. What that means is that either the
cable will work, or it won't. You're not going to see any difference
in image quality between cables (with the possible exception of
sparkling but that's not what you are describing).
no. why do you think HDMI cables are rated according to spec? care to
explain how a 1.2 cable can handle 10.2 Gbps 1080p or 4k resolution and
16bit colour depth when it can't?
What does that have to do with the image you see and the claims you
make as to being able to see a difference?
if you don't even know the answer to that, there's no point in even
discussing
You haven't posted anything that supports your theory that there is
any difference between cheap and expensive cables of the same
specification in terms of what you see on the screen.
oh, so now it's 'of the same specification' is it..
I suspect you have no practical knowledge of the matter and are only
talking theory. but no point in arguing endlessly. you will not convince
me, or anyone else with any experience with interconnects, that I/we do
not see and hear what we do see and hear, or don't, depending on the
cable used.
It's all in the befuddled mess you call your mind.
yeah, keep talkin. saying it's so doesn't make it so. and STILL you
don't say what real practical experience you have with cables which
makes you such an expert. but actually, don't keep talkin. I'm done with
you..
Speaking as one who has had formal education in electronics and has
spent 50 odd years pushing all sorts of signals through all sorts of
cables, I say that you are talking through your arse.
K
keithr
Guest
On 18/01/2016 1:28 PM, felix wrote:
No he doesn't, of course there are differences, there is cheap shit that
doesn't work well, there is mainstream product giving excellent results
at a reasonable price, and then there is overpriced rubbish that works
no better but is aimed at wood ducks like you who think that it must be
better because it costs more.
No he doesn't, of course there are differences, there is cheap shit that
doesn't work well, there is mainstream product giving excellent results
at a reasonable price, and then there is overpriced rubbish that works
no better but is aimed at wood ducks like you who think that it must be
better because it costs more.
R
Rod Speed
Guest
"felix" <me@nothere.invalid> wrote in message
news:dg3g29F6hr4U2@mid.individual.net...
But not on that question of the DIGITAL cable
affecting the saturation of the colors with DVDs.
> Clocky has been saying they are.
Like hell he did.
That one didnât.
> what's your problem?
I donât have one, fuckwit child.
news:dg3g29F6hr4U2@mid.individual.net...
But not on that question of the DIGITAL cable
affecting the saturation of the colors with DVDs.
> Clocky has been saying they are.
Like hell he did.
That one didnât.
> what's your problem?
I donât have one, fuckwit child.
R
Rod Speed
Guest
"Jeßus" <j@invalid.lan> wrote in message
news:l53p9bpkevjp768kvpf2kr5rtfripvonoc@4ax.com...
Not a chance, dunny cleaner possibly.
Clearly one that went bust if they were
actually stupid enough to employ him.
news:l53p9bpkevjp768kvpf2kr5rtfripvonoc@4ax.com...
Not a chance, dunny cleaner possibly.
Clearly one that went bust if they were
actually stupid enough to employ him.
F
Frank Slootweg
Guest
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
[All my comments, including questions which *must* be answered deleted.]
Gigantic amount of dodges duly noted. Refusal to provide *required*
information duly noted. Implicit surrender duly noted.
QED.
HTH. HAND. EOD. NI.
[All my comments, including questions which *must* be answered deleted.]
Now when you reply again, give us the *full* picture
*answer* the questions I raised in *this* response *and* all the
questions I raised in my *previous* response, which you didn't bother to
answer.
[...]
you're still confused. read back thru the thread
Gigantic amount of dodges duly noted. Refusal to provide *required*
information duly noted. Implicit surrender duly noted.
QED.
HTH. HAND. EOD. NI.
F
Frank Slootweg
Guest
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
So finally - after yet another teeth pulling operation - a *bit* of
detail. You should have said this *upfront*, because just saying that
you used DVD shrink, implies that you shrunk the copies and might have
made a - highly relevant - error there.
'movieS'? Did you copy more than one movie to one DVD?
Yes, you said only *that*, and I asked for the procedures, settings,
options, etc., and again you failed to give the required info.
See above.
Duh! I (read: we) want (read: require) the info *which I'm asking for*,
Believe it or not, but software like DVD Shrink and Nero doesn't run
itself! So we need to know exactly which operations you performed and
which settings/options/etc., you used.
*If* the visual results of both copies were the same, we would of
course not need this information. But because *you* *claim* they're
different and *you* clearly don't grasp the subject matter at hand, the
information *is* required.
Well, if it's irrelevant, then why did you mention it?
Bottom line: You're of course free to let this rest and shut up. But
if you keep stamping your feet, continue to utter nonsense and continue
to flame/insult people who clearly know much more than you do - which
isn't a big (t)ask -, you'll get what's coming. Such is life. Time to
get over it.
So finally - after yet another teeth pulling operation - a *bit* of
detail. You should have said this *upfront*, because just saying that
you used DVD shrink, implies that you shrunk the copies and might have
made a - highly relevant - error there.
'movieS'? Did you copy more than one movie to one DVD?
Yes, you said only *that*, and I asked for the procedures, settings,
options, etc., and again you failed to give the required info.
See above.
Duh! I (read: we) want (read: require) the info *which I'm asking for*,
Believe it or not, but software like DVD Shrink and Nero doesn't run
itself! So we need to know exactly which operations you performed and
which settings/options/etc., you used.
*If* the visual results of both copies were the same, we would of
course not need this information. But because *you* *claim* they're
different and *you* clearly don't grasp the subject matter at hand, the
information *is* required.
Well, if it's irrelevant, then why did you mention it?
Bottom line: You're of course free to let this rest and shut up. But
if you keep stamping your feet, continue to utter nonsense and continue
to flame/insult people who clearly know much more than you do - which
isn't a big (t)ask -, you'll get what's coming. Such is life. Time to
get over it.
F
felix
Guest
On 19-January-2016 6:12 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
I don't take orders from usenet 'contributors'
> Implicit surrender duly noted.
get your facts right and I'll answer relevant questions
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
felix <me@nothere.invalid> wrote:
[All my comments, including questions which *must* be answered deleted.]
Now when you reply again, give us the *full* picture
*answer* the questions I raised in *this* response *and* all the
questions I raised in my *previous* response, which you didn't bother to
answer.
[...]
you're still confused. read back thru the thread
Gigantic amount of dodges duly noted. Refusal to provide *required*
information duly noted.
I don't take orders from usenet 'contributors'
> Implicit surrender duly noted.
get your facts right and I'll answer relevant questions
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
F
felix
Guest
On 19-January-2016 1:34 AM, keithr wrote:
right, now tell me that a $5 cable works just as well as a $300 cable,
because you'll be contradicting yourself if you do. even the shielding
is relevant.
when did I say a cable 'must' be better simply because it costs more?
oh, the answer would be never, asshole
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
right, now tell me that a $5 cable works just as well as a $300 cable,
because you'll be contradicting yourself if you do. even the shielding
is relevant.
when did I say a cable 'must' be better simply because it costs more?
oh, the answer would be never, asshole
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
F
felix
Guest
On 19-January-2016 1:30 AM, keithr wrote:
so then genius, now explain to me please how a HDMI spec 1.1 cable can
perform the same as a HDMI spec 2 cable?
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/
On 18/01/2016 4:59 PM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 4:52 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 9:10 AM, felix wrote:
On 18-January-2016 10:14 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 18/01/2016 4:42 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 10:58 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 7:14 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 8:47 PM, keithr wrote:
On 17/01/2016 12:34 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:45 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 17/01/2016 9:14 AM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:08 PM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 9:39 PM, felix wrote:
On 17-January-2016 12:01 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 16/01/2016 10:41 AM, Je�us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 13:32:48 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 1:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 11:42:28 +1100, felix
me@nothere.invalid
wrote:
On 16-January-2016 11:17 AM, Clocky wrote:
On 15/01/2016 6:32 AM, felix wrote:
I suppose you can see a difference when using two
different
brands of
HDMI cables too can you, because it makes just as much
sense.
well you are completely wrong there because there are
visible
differences between HDMI cables. if you can't see them,
I can
only
assume you do not have equipment of sufficient quality
You really are a lost cause
Any HDMI cables that are *well made* out of reasonable
quality
materials and are not faulty in some way and of the same
length
should
produce the same result.
no, you are if you want to argue against what is well
known
among
audiophiles the world over, ie. that interconnect quality
affects
audio/video quality
LOL. Go to stereo.net and start a thread there on the
topic.
Espouse your theories there. Please do
NB: I see you edited out the rest of my reply (which I
reinstated).
Only reason you'd do that is because you're trolling,
which
I'm
at the
point of being convinced is exactly what you've been doing
these
past
three weeks or so. Your opinions on everything are just
*too*
ridiculous to be for real.
Agreed.
you must be as stupid as he is
You're trolling
oh really? care to point out the bit that was edited and then
reinstated?
no answer I see
I suggest it's you who's trolling. and you are at least
ignorant if you are unaware that AV interconnects have a
bearing on
performance.
You're ignorant of all the technical details of how a digital
signals
differs
am I? what have I said that's wrong about digital signals? quote
please..
and you are applying analog signal principles to digital
devices
and
connections.
so according to you, if I connect my Yamaha amp with a $2 HDMI
cable and
then with a $300 monster cable, I will see no difference. it's
not so.
you are aware that some HDMI cables can't handle 1080p for
example, I
suppose? but then.. I suppose not.
http://www.hdmi.org/consumer/finding_right_cable.aspx
and here's more detail about HDMI cable standards and specs..
http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F
Sure your HDMI cable can cause signal drops and errors but they
don't
manifest in any way shape or form in the way you are suggesting
with
your silly nonsense.
the silly nonsense that HDMI can affect video and audio
performance?
that silly nonsense? well you're wrong.
So either you are trolling or your a complete dill.
I'm neither. but you're ignorant on this matter.
You are the kind of wood duck that companies like Monster just
love,
they'd go broke without people like you.
Monster Cable Products, Inc is the world's leading manufacturer of
high
end cables that connect audio/video components for home, car and
professional use. Monster's audio cables have high performance
sound
characteristics that increase the clarity, dynamics and power
of the
audio signals. The video cables give improved picture quality to
television and home theatre systems.
(and I can confirm that is so)
Monster Cable Products, Inc. was started in 1979 by Noel Lee, who
was
then a laser-fusion design engineer at Lawrence-Livermore
Laboratory, as
well as an audiophile and drummer/musician, found that wires of
different constructions produced varying degrees of audio
performance
when hooked up to loudspeakers.
(exactly what I have found and said here and got rubbished for it)
From this discovery, he crafted a high performance cable. He
named it
Monster Cable, and founded an industry that has since exploded.
The
creation of Monster Cable started a new product category of high
performance audio cables that revolutionised the audio market.
Lee chose the name "Monster" for two reasons. It sounded strong
and
powerful, and the size of the cable was "monstrous" compared to
ordinary
loudspeaker cable. The name was a hit straightaway and now is
sometimes
misused to mean any high performance cable.
Monster offers more than 1000 products, and has become an
indispensable
accessory for music lovers, audiophiles, recording studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts.
More than 2,000 different CDs have given Monster Cable credit
on the
jacket of their recordings and hundreds of feature film sound
tracks and
Foley sound effects have been recorded with Monster Cable.
-------------------------------------------------------
http://www.ehifi.com.au/brands/monster.aspx
but of course you know better, and it's all nonsense. idiot!
You can believe whatever scam you like,
because it isn't. I have just one question for you.. what
experience do
YOU PERSONALLY have with AV cables and decent AV equipment?
More then you obviously when you can't even grasp the basics of
digital signals.
you're avoiding the question. what testing have YOU personally done of
AV input/output cables? part of my working career was with a
manufacturer of hi end audio.
Which make your claims even more ludicrous.
still no answer about YOUR experience
why do you think at trade shows they DON'T use cheap cables if it
makes no difference?
Gross profit is why. Selling overpriced cables to numpties like you is
big business.
and other 'numpties' like.. "music lovers, audiophiles, recording
studios, sound
professionals, musicians, custom installers and home theatre
enthusiasts" apparently
but read this and understand why what you think you see is
impossible
with HDMI.
http://www.cnet.com/news/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/
http://denon.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/192/~/differences-between-hdmi-versions-1.1,-1.2,-1.3a,-1.4-and-2.0%3F
You still don't get it. There are different cables supporting
different data rates and features. What that means is that either the
cable will work, or it won't. You're not going to see any difference
in image quality between cables (with the possible exception of
sparkling but that's not what you are describing).
no. why do you think HDMI cables are rated according to spec? care to
explain how a 1.2 cable can handle 10.2 Gbps 1080p or 4k resolution
and
16bit colour depth when it can't?
What does that have to do with the image you see and the claims you
make as to being able to see a difference?
if you don't even know the answer to that, there's no point in even
discussing
You haven't posted anything that supports your theory that there is
any difference between cheap and expensive cables of the same
specification in terms of what you see on the screen.
oh, so now it's 'of the same specification' is it..
I suspect you have no practical knowledge of the matter and are only
talking theory. but no point in arguing endlessly. you will not
convince
me, or anyone else with any experience with interconnects, that
I/we do
not see and hear what we do see and hear, or don't, depending on the
cable used.
It's all in the befuddled mess you call your mind.
yeah, keep talkin. saying it's so doesn't make it so. and STILL you
don't say what real practical experience you have with cables which
makes you such an expert. but actually, don't keep talkin. I'm done with
you..
Speaking as one who has had formal education in electronics and has
spent 50 odd years pushing all sorts of signals through all sorts of
cables, I say that you are talking through your arse.
so then genius, now explain to me please how a HDMI spec 1.1 cable can
perform the same as a HDMI spec 2 cable?
--
"As long as there is this book [Koran] there will be no peace in the world"
-William Gladstone, four times PM of Great Britain
http://www.siotw.org/