Home audio & video forum: 60Hz vs 120Hz

The $20 blujeans cable did just as well as the $130 Monster we tested. Yes there are some cheap (read, junk) cables floating around, but if you do a little due diligence and get some of the better versions of the less expensive examples, you'll do just fine, especially for shorter runs. Monoprice, Bluejeanscable & Amazon premium worked well when we compared connecting & viewing several different components vs a Monster Cable purchased at BB. We did get two defective cables from Monoprice, but the replacements did fine as well. FWIW, Bluejeans cable is run by HT enthusiasts, so you'll get decent support there if so needed.

Just got done with a chat with a Samsung support person.

They tell me that most, if not all, TV's, can only accept 60Hz input.

So I don't understand the 3:2 pulldown when using a 60Hz TV versus a 120Hz TV.

Where does the pull-down occur? There seems to be a "garbage in - garbage out" dynamic here.

If the TV can only accept a 60Hz input - isn't the 3:2 done BEFORE my TV gets the input? So if my TV "upconverts" to 120Hz, which it does, if its getting a 3:2 pulldown conversion input - won't that just result in a 6:4 pulldown per second?

i have a $160 Monster Cable hdmi they dont compare to rocket fish, sony or any of the cheaper ones. you get what you pay for and i want that bandwidth over 10.5gbps 1080/24p on blu-ray with a $20 dollar hdmi cable is just a waste of having a blu-ray player or ps3. i like that the koolaid but you are 100% correct.

The voice of reason. Cheaper cables may be fine for your system, just make sure they are not falling apart or have obvious defects in them.

The boys at CNET seem like they would know something about this subject. Below is a link to their discussion about HDMI cables. They specifically recommend the cheaper cables (but ones that meet a minimum standand of quality). They go as far as to use only the cheaper cables during the testing of products.

While I'm sure the guys who are recommending the more expensive cables in their posts believe they are getting more for their money, I'm afraid they are most likely the victims of savy marketing.

Cheers!

http://reviews.cnet.com/hdmi-guide/

I am not going to say I know anything about the cables you were looking at only I know they are a rip off. I have several friends who work at Best Buy and they are told to promote the sales of monster cable. In fact they get rewarded for selling it. They might not make comission but the managers of the top departments get a trip to the best but conference down in the states, I believe it is Orlando Florida, my friend has got to go 3 times now. They get huge swag bags as well, laptops, cables, dvds, jump drives, store gift cards, I mean thousands worth. The reason is the 100% mark up, so if they sell a cable for $100 it is $50 profit for Best Buy. But thanks to knowing friends who work there they pick the cables up for me at half price.

You can get burned buying cheap cable, but only because it is poorly made. Cold solder joints, inflexible connector ends, shorts or breaks along the conductors and reflections can all impair the presence of the signal. A well made - strike that - properly made cable, even if it's $5, will perform perfectly transmitting digital material.

In the analog world, signal attenuation (lessening) and can occur as cable distance increases, due to reflections, RF noise, and the like. But the sending and receiving circuits should properly deal with that, although cable composition can improve things a bit. You should see what the guys who install cell towers pay for RF antenna cables!

I personally use the cheapest 'sturdy' cables I can find for both my analog and digital needs. While I fear the possibility of online cables being the rejects of ETDR testing, paying more than $5 plus $2 per foot for home audio/video cabling is sheer insanity (double that for a 100%, lifetime, no-questions-asked, door-to-door warranty).

Of course, there are economic benefits to those more expensive cables, as PT Barnum foretold. It keeps the GDP a smidge higher!

We just purchased this tv - samsung LN46-650, and can not figure out how to have the 60hz be 120hz. We've looked through the manual and this forum, as well as the samsung website. Could someone please explain how to do this? We just upgraded the firmware, from 2004.0 to 2007.0 thinking that perhaps it is a firmware issue. Thank you for your help. Julia

60Hz/120Hz is only an issue with LCD tv's. Plasma does not have this problem. Yes I said problem, 60Hz refresh is an inherent flaw in LCD display technology, and they had to go 120Hz to make the video better.

Just my personal experience when buying a new tv. As far as the difference between 60HZ and 120HZ, this only applies to LCD. Plasma does not have this problem. ( I agree...problem). This is why I went with a Panasonic 50" 1080p plasma. ($1800). As far as HDMI, you can really be fooled by manufacturers that claim that you need a $2000 Super-Duper Street Fighter 3 diamond-plated cable. HDMI is digital. It's like turning on a light switch. It either works or it doesn't. This is why I went with a $7 HDMI cable from eBay. (That's right, $7). I bought 2 of them. One for my cable box and one for my PS3. They work perfectly. but, thats the thing. They were either going to work perfectly or not work at all. There is no in between. And just a personal not about Best Buy. Their reps are absolute idiots in my opinion. I have been there when they tried to sell me everything and try to convince me that I had to have it. Do your own research and you will always find the right answer.

I just "upgraded" from a 60 HZ LCD to a 120 HZ LCD, and so far I am NOT pleased. The motion quality on film content looks unnaturally sharp, even with the Auto-Motion feature turned off completely. Movies, even old movies, look like they were shot on digital video.

Admittedly, all content with a digital native format looks great, but since I don't watch much sports and I don't care to spelunk through Simon Cowell's pores, and mainly I want the most out of viewing films, this so-called "improvement" seems more like a step backward.

I was perfectly happy with my previous LCD, a 60 HZ Samsung, until it met with a tragic accident. Are my complaints with the new model the result the faster refresh rate? Would I be better off going back to 60 HZ version?

I just want my movies to look like movies, not Young & the Restless! Someone out there smarter than me, help me, please!

Josten,

You bring up a good point that the user who's post you replied to may not have his DVD player set to 24fps, or he/she may not be watching true 24fps film source material on Blu-Ray, and the comment about "video" content looking better than "film" content at 120Hz seems a little odd. There are apparently a lot of variables with 120Hz that all need to be met to experience it properly. Both of my TVs that are 120Hz do in fact use 5:5 pulldown, and I watch BR movies and in my feeble opinion, the movies look stellar. But, that's how my eyes perceive the output, which may be different than someone else.

Just depends on what you want to watch the most of!

Movies (24fps) = 120Hz 5:5 pulldown
Antenna, Cable, Satellite, Videos (not 24fps) = 60Hz 3:2 pulldown

Best of both worlds (at the moment) = 120hz that you can switch to 60hz

its is so worth the estra price. the bigger the screen the more it matters. i say anything over 40" you want a 120Hz TV. trust me you will regret a 60Hz but dont buy a 240Hz they dont double the frames like the 120Hz. standard tv is in 60Hz that means 60 frames per second with a 120Hz you get 120 frames per second very important especially on larger tvs and if its an LCD or LED you will want that. plasma needs about 680Hz but they need it

I'm a novice, but something is telling me to go with the Vizio 120HZ as opposed to the name brand Samsung 60HZ, any help would be greatly appreciated