HDMI confusion: Monoprice vs. Blue Jeans


So I read the Audioholics 50 cable HDMI shootout, and became convinced that HDMI either passes or fails. That is, it either successfully transmits 1080P data (for example) or it does not.

I happened to have a 6 foot Monoprice HDMI cable and a 6 foot Blue Jeams HDMI as well. For the heck of it, I ran both cables from my cable box (1080i), DVD player (480i), and XBox (1080p) just for the sake of comparison.

The thing is, the Blue Jeans cable definitely had bolder colors, and the Monoprice definitely was a bit more muted but slightly more detailed in presenting images. Another possibility, of course, is that I am clinically insane.

So does this mean that there actually *are* differences among HDMI cables, just as there would be among component video cables (I tried several of those before settling on Tara Labs RSC)? Or am I simply a crazy person who saw non-existent differences and the signal passed (as opposed to failed) on both cables and looked identical, and my eyes simply deceived me.

Any assistance on this issue would be greatly appreciated, especially as concerns other HDMI cables you've tried and loved vis-a-vis others (if indeed such distinctions exist in HDMI cables).

Thanks!
thedautch
I did a/b with generic vs BJC series-1 4' and BJC was clearly better - sound and pic diff was clear. IMO, you can get a 4' BJC length for $20, just get it - it is worth it!

I am also using a Monoprice 35' 22AWG silver plated to my projector and it is pretty good. But, if I bring my Oppo next to projector and hook it up with Blue Jeans 4', I find picture more vibrant. I am ok with mono for long length now as don't want to spend $300-$500 on a 40' long hdmi cable at this time.
If you are not really using HDMI for audio, i.e. just TV/movies/Blu Ray, then i would recommend the Blue Jeans. It was a HUGE jump from the free cable from Comcast and even a $70 Belkin cable from Target. The colors were much better and the audio was much improved.

The video quality is very good-- good enough for me. The audio quality is good, but of course could use being improved. If you watch a lot of concert DVD/Blu Rays or are super critical with your movie watching--i'd consider a modest upgrade.
Negative, people. Bits are bits are bits. The information is there, or it isn't. There is error checking at both ends of the HDMI cable. Jitter and electrical interference is not a factor here. Color space does not change with different cables. If the cable is faulty, you will see a little loss in the form of sparkly dots, then the signal cuts out.

I have no doubt that all of you see a difference, because of the placebo effect. How could a company charge 4000 bucks for a cable if there is no difference, right? Sorry folks, when it comes to expensive digital HDMI cables, it's all snake oil salesmanship.

Have someone switch different HDMI cables randomly without you knowing. Thing is, the placebo effect works even when you know there IS a placebo.

The good news is, you are not insane. The bad news is, you are a sucker. Worse news is, there are so many people that have fallen into the same trap, and then continue to reinforce this false ideal amongst themselves.

I really feel bad for people that waste a ton of money on stuff based on the principles of magic and witchcraft, instead of testable science.
I recently upgraded to a 60" Panasonic plasma 600 Hz 1080p. Currently I use Belkin and Philips HDMI cables I got at Sam's Club. What cable would I need to upgrade to to get an appreciable improvement--BJC, Pangea from Audio Advisor, Wireworld, AQ, Kimber, upscale Monster?

I really feel bad for people that waste a ton of money on stuff based on the principles of magic and witchcraft, instead of testable science.

If "testable science" were as absolute as you make it out to be, no "scientific fact" would ever be overturned or modified.

If it's all attributable to the placebo effect, why do our subjective impressions run counter to our expectations so often?