Fiber optic HDMI cable

Originally Posted by rreid

Here's what Stan Palguyev of Lenexpo Electronics has to say:

A major problem of every cable is its impedance (resistance to pass the signal). Wrong: In cables, "impedance" has nothing whatsoever to do with "resistance to pass the signal".

A properly built fiber optic cable would have virtually no impedance, resulting in zero loss. Misleading: the fiber optic cable will have loss for reasons that have nothing to do with impedance.

. . . a proper installation would require impedance and signal strength testing, which takes up a lot of valuable time. Impedance testing, NO! Signal strength testing, perhaps.

. . . a lot of companies state that their optical fiber has no loss, which is not true. Some of the light signal degrades within the fiber, mostly due to impurities in the glass. The degradation of the signal depends upon the purity of the glass and the wavelength of the transmitted light. Well, I'm glad he cleared that up . . .

When it comes down to copper, there are 2 types to choose from: a 24AWG1 and a 28AWG. mmmm, seem that he conveniently overlooked 22AWG

And just as with any other cable type, impedance plays a very big role here. no it doesn't!!!!

2 major factors that determine impedance are AWG and length. How dumb is this guy? Length has NOTHING to do with impedance! Impedance is a function of the relationship between the center conductor outer diameter (AWG), shield inner diameter, dialectric constant of the the dialectric, and the thickness of the dialectric.

A lower number of AWG would mean a thicker cable and lower impedance. TOTALLY WRONG!!!

The maximum recommended distance for a 28AWG cable if you are running 720P or 1080i is 13 feet. Wrong again!!!

Since the 24AWG cable has lower impedance, it can run for much longer distances than a 28AWG. Wrong! With HDMI cables, both the 24AWG and the 28AWG as well as the 22AWG all have the same characteristic impedance which is 100 Ohms. Indeed the 24AWG can carry signals for longer distances than 28AWG and the 22AWG can carry signals over even greater distances it has nothing whatsoever to do with impedance.

Maximum Recommended length for a 24AWG at the resolutions of 720P or 1080i would be 50 feet. In most cases, a standard 24AWG or 28AWG cable would not pass 1080P. An Ability to pass this type of signal is a very rare quality of a copper cable and requires a specific design, which raises the price of the cable and shortens the length of it dramatically. Bunch of crap!

A copper cable is always a cheaper way out, but unfortunately it’s capable of carrying resolutions only up to 1080i and 720p and can run up to 50 feet. Untrue. False. Wrong.

It may be self-serving for Palguyev to promote the higher-cost fiber optic HDMI cable over copper, boy, ain't it ever!

he still makes the point of making impedance and signal strength testing before installation, especially if installation is to be in-wall. not to mention that he has lied, misinformed and demonstrated that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

Originally Posted by Scottnot

Sorry, but this guy Palguyev, has his head where the sun don't shine . . . . or he is just plain dumb . . . . or he is a complete liar.


I suspect that this guy is a featured graduate of the Monster Cable School of Marketing. He's just shoveling BS.

Too bad, because there are no doubt situations where fiber optic may be a viable alternative to HDMI, but his presentation does a disservice to the cause.

Originally Posted by Stew4HD

Then, how can a cable carry 1080i but not 1080p? Hmmmm.