Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??

Last response: in Home Theatre
Share
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??

iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.

Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.

If you think iam wrong let me know :) 

Thanks.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>
>
> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 

If you're using component cables which carry an analog signal your probably
going to get the better piture with the better cable. If you're using DVI or
HDMI or firewire which are all digital connections, then there will be no
difference between a standard cable and a monster since the standard will
pass the same exact digital data as the monster. With analog signals, the
better the cable the better the transmission and the better the display.

>
> Thanks.
>
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Son Of Sheep. wrote:
>
> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 

Monster cables are an enormous waste of money. You'll be paying an
enormous premium just for the brand name, with no improvement in your
quality whatsoever. I'm in the US, so I can't recommend a good
Australian source for cables, but here it is quite possible to buy very
high quality component cables for under US$20. Those $20 cables perform
identically to the much, MUCH, more expensive Monster cables.
Related resources
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Unless there's something wrong with your existing cables -or- they're
the wrong type, monster cables won't make any difference. Higher
quality cables might only make a difference over very long runs.


On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 04:55:42 +1000, Son Of Sheep. <sheep.com.au>
wrote:

>
>
>Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
>iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
>Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
>If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
>Thanks.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

The high speed video camera guy at my hubby's work says that cables don't
make a bit of difference for a digital signal. To demonstrate, he used
plain steel wire (like a coat hanger) to transmit the signal from the high
speed video camera to a laptop. For digital, either the signal is there or
the signal is not there. This is quite evident when the signal strength goes
bad on our over the air HD signals.

For what it is worth.
no one

"Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>
>
> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
> Thanks.
>
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Son of man" <sonofman1@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:f_adnaL9H4SflUXfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> "Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
> news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>
>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>
>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>
>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
> If you're using component cables which carry an analog signal your
> probably going to get the better piture with the better cable. If you're
> using DVI or HDMI or firewire which are all digital connections, then
> there will be no difference between a standard cable and a monster since
> the standard will pass the same exact digital data as the monster. With
> analog signals, the better the cable the better the transmission and the
> better the display.

conventional perfectly average coax cables with normal gold plated
connections are MORE than sufficient to carry 1080/720 HD component video
without any noticeable degradation or roll-off. A single component channel
of HD has 1/10 th bandwidth of normal analog cableTV. It ain't rocket
science.

of course, I would recommend that anyone outside America purchase the
Monster cables at the highest possible price, since we need the trade to
ease our balance of payments problems

if fact, you should buy several sets - just to be sure you have them if you
need them

do it today!

While you are at it, drink a Coke, smoke some Marlboro's and eat at
McDonalds as often as possible. We need the money!

(sadly, I suspect that Monster probably makes its cables in China - anyone
know for sure?)
July 16, 2005 8:55:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

That's a rather idiotic comparison. You might just well have said that
you transferred the data via carrier pigeon....

Sure, you can transmit digital data over *unshielded* coat hangar wire.
But it will be subject to noise and whatever limitations present in
the material used for the conductor.

That said, any cable using minimal shielding and copper conductor should
be just fine for a digital signal. For people who want high end cabling
at a bargain price, I'd point them here:

http://www.diycable.com/main/default.php

I use these guys because I'm too lazy to roll my own. 8-) For someone
with a little time and some soldering skills, it's quite easy to make
audio/video cabling that's better than most cables you'd find at your
local electronics store (including Monster Cable).

Cheers,


nonone wrote:
> The high speed video camera guy at my hubby's work says that cables don't
> make a bit of difference for a digital signal. To demonstrate, he used
> plain steel wire (like a coat hanger) to transmit the signal from the high
> speed video camera to a laptop. For digital, either the signal is there or
> the signal is not there. This is quite evident when the signal strength goes
> bad on our over the air HD signals.
>
> For what it is worth.
> no one
>
> "Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
> news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>
>>
>>Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>
>>iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>>componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>>get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>
>>Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>>colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>
>>If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>
>
>
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 8:55:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

I completely agree. Build quality, good connectors etc. are much more
important than the logo on the cable. You can get very good cables for much
less than Monster price.


"Jim Gilliland" <usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote in message
news:42d818c3$0$30864$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> Son Of Sheep. wrote:
>>
>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>
>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>
>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>
>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
> Monster cables are an enormous waste of money. You'll be paying an
> enormous premium just for the brand name, with no improvement in your
> quality whatsoever. I'm in the US, so I can't recommend a good Australian
> source for cables, but here it is quite possible to buy very high quality
> component cables for under US$20. Those $20 cables perform identically to
> the much, MUCH, more expensive Monster cables.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 9:51:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Iam just trying the getthe best picture Not alot i can do other than
better cables. So ill try and see either way ill have some more cables
for A new DVD player or maybe Duxplayer.

Only got a Svideo dvd player at them omment.

Thanks.


On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 15:01:09 -0400, "Son of man"
<sonofman1@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
>news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>
>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>
>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>
>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
>If you're using component cables which carry an analog signal your probably
>going to get the better piture with the better cable. If you're using DVI or
>HDMI or firewire which are all digital connections, then there will be no
>difference between a standard cable and a monster since the standard will
>pass the same exact digital data as the monster. With analog signals, the
>better the cable the better the transmission and the better the display.
>
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 1:27:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:h92dnc11TNkd2EXfRVn-iQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Son of man" <sonofman1@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:f_adnaL9H4SflUXfRVn-tA@comcast.com...
>> "Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>>
>>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>>
>>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>>
>>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>>
>> If you're using component cables which carry an analog signal your
>> probably going to get the better piture with the better cable. If you're
>> using DVI or HDMI or firewire which are all digital connections, then
>> there will be no difference between a standard cable and a monster since
>> the standard will pass the same exact digital data as the monster. With
>> analog signals, the better the cable the better the transmission and the
>> better the display.
>
> conventional perfectly average coax cables with normal gold plated
> connections are MORE than sufficient to carry 1080/720 HD component video
> without any noticeable degradation or roll-off. A single component channel
> of HD has 1/10 th bandwidth of normal analog cableTV. It ain't rocket
> science.

The male coax cable connectors are compatible with the RCA-type component
female connectors? If they are, you've certainly suggested the best metod
for connecting component if what you say is true about the bandwith of coax
being 10 times that of a single component channel. That's awesome.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 1:39:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Son of man" <sonofman1@comcast.net> wrote in message


>> conventional perfectly average coax cables with normal gold plated
>> connections are MORE than sufficient to carry 1080/720 HD component video
>> without any noticeable degradation or roll-off. A single component
>> channel of HD has 1/10 th bandwidth of normal analog cableTV. It ain't
>> rocket science.
>
> The male coax cable connectors are compatible with the RCA-type component
> female connectors? If they are, you've certainly suggested the best metod
> for connecting component if what you say is true about the bandwith of
> coax being 10 times that of a single component channel. That's awesome.

I think you are misunderstanding what I posted.... coaxial cable is a type
of cable construction where one conductor is inside of the other, separated
by a round insulation layer. It allows for higher frequencies and lower
noise than the "twisted pair" design used for audio and telephone
applications.

All component cables, video cables and "cable TV" cables, regardless of the
end connections, are coaxial cables. Some of different impedance, some of
different materials but essentially the same fundamental design.

What I said is that the lowly, ugly, cheap black cable from the cable
company is carrying a 750 MHz bandwidth signal (assuming you live in an
upgraded HFC digitial cable environment). And that this signal is 10x the
bandwidth of any HD component video signal.

There are no special needs in carrying a component video HD signal -
essentially any coax will do - especially for the short distances usually
found in home theater.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 2:57:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

ZVR wrote:

>I completely agree. Build quality, good connectors etc. are much more
>important than the logo on the cable. You can get very good cables for much
>less than Monster price.
>
>
>
...

One reason for moving up one step from the bottom (for me,
to Radio Shack dubbing cables) is to get good positive
connections. I found $20-plus for 90cm well spent. Can't
see why I'd go any higher than that.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 4:18:00 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6ZydnW8tmJCOk0TfRVn-rw@comcast.com...
>
> "Son of man" <sonofman1@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
>
>>> conventional perfectly average coax cables with normal gold plated
>>> connections are MORE than sufficient to carry 1080/720 HD component
>>> video without any noticeable degradation or roll-off. A single component
>>> channel of HD has 1/10 th bandwidth of normal analog cableTV. It ain't
>>> rocket science.
>>
>> The male coax cable connectors are compatible with the RCA-type component
>> female connectors? If they are, you've certainly suggested the best metod
>> for connecting component if what you say is true about the bandwith of
>> coax being 10 times that of a single component channel. That's awesome.
>
> I think you are misunderstanding what I posted.... coaxial cable is a type
> of cable construction where one conductor is inside of the other,
> separated by a round insulation layer. It allows for higher frequencies
> and lower noise than the "twisted pair" design used for audio and
> telephone applications.
>
> All component cables, video cables and "cable TV" cables, regardless of
> the end connections, are coaxial cables.

Ahh... I thought only the "cable TV" cables were what are referred to as
coaxial. But I should have known better since there is digital coaxial which
has an RCA-type connector also.

> Some of different impedance, some of different materials but essentially
> the same fundamental design.
>
> What I said is that the lowly, ugly, cheap black cable from the cable
> company is carrying a 750 MHz bandwidth signal (assuming you live in an
> upgraded HFC digitial cable environment). And that this signal is 10x the
> bandwidth of any HD component video signal.
>
> There are no special needs in carrying a component video HD signal -
> essentially any coax will do - especially for the short distances usually
> found in home theater.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 4:19:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"ZVR" <nospamever@me.net> wrote in message
news:e_KdnbVzhfatEkXfRVn-hA@rogers.com...
>I completely agree. Build quality, good connectors etc. are much more
>important than the logo on the cable. You can get very good cables for much
>less than Monster price.
>
>
> "Jim Gilliland" <usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote in message
> news:42d818c3$0$30864$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
>> Son Of Sheep. wrote:
>>>
>>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>>
>>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>>
>>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>>
>>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>>
>> Monster cables are an enormous waste of money. You'll be paying an
>> enormous premium just for the brand name, with no improvement in your
>> quality whatsoever. I'm in the US, so I can't recommend a good
>> Australian source for cables, but here it is quite possible to buy very
>> high quality component cables for under US$20. Those $20 cables perform
>> identically to the much, MUCH, more expensive Monster cables.

Monster markets to the rich, who love showing off their high priced
equipment whether it produces the same quality isn't the issue, its all
about status.
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 4:19:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

>
> Monster markets to the rich, who love showing off their high priced
> equipment whether it produces the same quality isn't the issue, its all
> about status.
>


I disagree... Monster sells their cables to those that want to look rich.
The rich didn't get that way by buying Monster cables. :)  :) 
Anonymous
July 16, 2005 6:24:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"D J" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:p aCdndNDrIXIokTfRVn-2g@scnresearch.com...
>
>>
>> Monster markets to the rich, who love showing off their high priced
>> equipment whether it produces the same quality isn't the issue, its all
>> about status.
>>
>
>
> I disagree... Monster sells their cables to those that want to look rich.
> The rich didn't get that way by buying Monster cables. :)  :) 

I stand corrected.

:) 

Now, excuse me, I'm off to get me some awesome new Monster cables.
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 12:28:57 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 04:55:42 +1000, Son Of Sheep. <sheep.com.au>
wrote:

>Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??

Not really. I've heard a slight difference in microphone applications
using their $100+ high end stuff verses a cheap $5 cable. So in an
audio studio situation where theree could be 40 live inputs they might
make a good bit of difference, although it's still like the cherry
ontop of the sunday.

For video... I haven't noticed any difference in quality. I've got a
set of monster components and a set of monster PS2 Components. They
work, and do a good job. The PS2 can be justified because they are
much thicker looking cables than the sony version. I'd be willing to
bet that the monsters have a thicker insulator from the center than
the thin stuff.

I install A/V equipment for a living, and I mostly fabricate all of
the cables we use, often running cables 100s of feet. Usually a
single video channel will be fine on RG59 cable. It's thick and
cheap, and you can crimp your own BNCs on it, and then use a BNC to
RCA adapter to plug it into your stuff. You can also solder a RCA on
if you have the skills. We also use Minimax cable sometimes when
pulling through condouits and other space sensative applications. The
minimax is much smaller diameter, and has the same bandwidth as RG59.
For really long distance runs we will use the bigger thicker more
sheilded RG6 cable. That is the stuff you should run for RF (Cable
TV) type stuff. They fit all that analog TV, digital TV, Phone, and
Internet down the one single cable, so you know it should be real good
to cary a single video signal.

So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
you need.
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 6:52:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Trailswipe" <andy@fish.com> wrote in message
news:n0jkd1d9vmn2bcsi9os7ad1ag4o28gb015@4ax.com...


> So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
> go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
> connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
> you need.

I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.

Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.
Anonymous
July 17, 2005 9:35:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p OydnYrX04abNEffRVn-1g@comcast.com...
>
> "Trailswipe" <andy@fish.com> wrote in message
> news:n0jkd1d9vmn2bcsi9os7ad1ag4o28gb015@4ax.com...
>
>
>> So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
>> go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
>> connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
>> you need.
>
> I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
> impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.
>
> Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.
>

I would... good crimp on type F connectors are readily available and
preserve the correct impedance. Adding the RCA adapter is no worse than
directly connecting a crimp on RCA connector, if you can find one. RCA
connections aren't impedance controlled at all so you're going to have a
mismatch anyway. This is why the high frequency connections from a sat.
dish are all type F connectors. For RCA connections into component HD/SD
or composite inputs the adapters will have NO affect.
July 18, 2005 12:58:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Son Of Sheep. wrote:
>
> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??

Only in your bank balance
Anonymous
July 18, 2005 1:10:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"D J" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:o N-dnRVNr7_fZEffRVn-vQ@scnresearch.com...
>
> "Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:p OydnYrX04abNEffRVn-1g@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Trailswipe" <andy@fish.com> wrote in message
>> news:n0jkd1d9vmn2bcsi9os7ad1ag4o28gb015@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>> So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
>>> go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
>>> connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
>>> you need.
>>
>> I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
>> impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.
>>
>> Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.
>>
>
> I would... good crimp on type F connectors are readily available and
> preserve the correct impedance. Adding the RCA adapter is no worse than
> directly connecting a crimp on RCA connector, if you can find one. RCA
> connections aren't impedance controlled at all so you're going to have a
> mismatch anyway. This is why the high frequency connections from a sat.
> dish are all type F connectors. For RCA connections into component HD/SD
> or composite inputs the adapters will have NO affect.

There is nothing at all wrong with using RG6 other than the stiffness of the
cable can be inconvenient and can stress the jacks and solder connections in
the equipment. The impedance is exactly what you need and the connectors do
not affect the impedance. Some of the adapters from F to BNC and RCA
connections are not the best, but the problems usually come from re-using
them after the center conductor has loosened the internal connection.

Leonard
Anonymous
July 18, 2005 5:14:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Curmudgeon" <curmudgeon@buzzoff.net> wrote in message
news:38DCe.44709$ag7.34078@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> Son Of Sheep. wrote:
>>
>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
> Only in your bank balance

Oh ho ho ho!
Anonymous
July 18, 2005 10:26:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"D J" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:o N-dnRVNr7_fZEffRVn-vQ@scnresearch.com...
>
> "Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:p OydnYrX04abNEffRVn-1g@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Trailswipe" <andy@fish.com> wrote in message
>> news:n0jkd1d9vmn2bcsi9os7ad1ag4o28gb015@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>>> So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
>>> go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
>>> connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
>>> you need.
>>
>> I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
>> impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.
>>
>> Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.
>>
>
> I would... good crimp on type F connectors are readily available and
> preserve the correct impedance. Adding the RCA adapter is no worse than
> directly connecting a crimp on RCA connector, if you can find one. RCA
> connections aren't impedance controlled at all so you're going to have a
> mismatch anyway. This is why the high frequency connections from a sat.
> dish are all type F connectors. For RCA connections into component HD/SD
> or composite inputs the adapters will have NO affect.

What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
source of failure and are best avoided.
Anonymous
July 19, 2005 3:17:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 18:26:28 -0400, "Randy Sweeney"
<DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"D J" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
>news:o N-dnRVNr7_fZEffRVn-vQ@scnresearch.com...
>>
>> "Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:p OydnYrX04abNEffRVn-1g@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> "Trailswipe" <andy@fish.com> wrote in message
>>> news:n0jkd1d9vmn2bcsi9os7ad1ag4o28gb015@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>> So... If I wanted to have the best video cables for the buck I would
>>>> go to Home depot and pick up some RG6, some crimp on F or BNC
>>>> connectors, then adapters to bring the connection to RCA or whatever
>>>> you need.
>>>
>>> I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
>>> impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.
>>>
>>> Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.
>>>
>>
>> I would... good crimp on type F connectors are readily available and
>> preserve the correct impedance. Adding the RCA adapter is no worse than
>> directly connecting a crimp on RCA connector, if you can find one. RCA
>> connections aren't impedance controlled at all so you're going to have a
>> mismatch anyway. This is why the high frequency connections from a sat.
>> dish are all type F connectors. For RCA connections into component HD/SD
>> or composite inputs the adapters will have NO affect.
>
>What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
>source of failure and are best avoided.
>
>

In my 28 year career as an Electronic Engineer and experience as an
amateur radio operator, I've never seen the term "ohmic connection"

Maybe that feature is unique to the Monster Cable brand.
Anonymous
July 19, 2005 3:17:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Jack Ak" <akjack@excite.com> wrote in message


>>What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
>>source of failure and are best avoided.
>>
>>
>
> In my 28 year career as an Electronic Engineer and experience as an
> amateur radio operator, I've never seen the term "ohmic connection"
>
> Maybe that feature is unique to the Monster Cable brand.

maybe you should get out more
google it to see what it means

let's see, I got my BSEE in 1978... that means I have less experience than
you
shame on you
Anonymous
July 19, 2005 3:17:04 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p umdnfx3muEt_kHfRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Jack Ak" <akjack@excite.com> wrote in message
>
>
>>>What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
>>>source of failure and are best avoided.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In my 28 year career as an Electronic Engineer and experience as an
>> amateur radio operator, I've never seen the term "ohmic connection"
>>
>> Maybe that feature is unique to the Monster Cable brand.
>
Maybe it means that the connection is resistive and not inductive or
capacitive.
--
Bearman
If it's got tits, tires, tubes, or transistors, it's trouble.
Anonymous
July 19, 2005 11:30:58 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:p umdnfx3muEt_kHfRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
>
> "Jack Ak" <akjack@excite.com> wrote in message
>
>
>>>What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
>>>source of failure and are best avoided.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In my 28 year career as an Electronic Engineer and experience as an
>> amateur radio operator, I've never seen the term "ohmic connection"
>>
>> Maybe that feature is unique to the Monster Cable brand.
>
> maybe you should get out more
> google it to see what it means
>
> let's see, I got my BSEE in 1978... that means I have less experience than
> you
> shame on you

reading it today, it is obvious that my comment was inappropriately rude and
ill mannered

please accept my apologies

the term means linear, a pure resistance (the ideal connection), like a
typical metal to metal connection is assumed to be

the problem is that you think you are putting in such contacts, but with the
inevitable wear, corrosion and dirt - every supposedly ohmic connection is a
problem waiting to happen
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 3:37:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

That's quite a hodgepodge of information and misinformation. Some of it
is absolutely correct, some of it is absolutely false, some of it is
merely confused.

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
>
> a.. all the coax for a particular connection -- Y/Pb/Pr (3 lengths) or Y/C (2 lengths) --
should be taken from the same bulk spool. Coax on a spool is generally of
consistent behavior,
where-as behavior between spools could be slightly different.

The difference between spools of coax are insignificant. I wouldn't mix
brands or varieties, but even that won't have a noticeable impact.

> a.. RG59 and RG6 are 75 ohm; video applications are 75 ohm

True.

> b.. RG58 and RG8 are 50 ohm; audio applications are 50 ohm

False. 50 ohm wire is used for baseband ethernet and for many radio
applications. Characteristic impedance isn't an issue for audio frequencies.

> g.. Each Y, Pb and Pr cable must be the same length !!! Some folks claim a 1 inch difference
will result in a noticable video quality issue.

Nonsense. It's convenient for them to all be the same length, but
varying the length won't have any impact on your signal quality (within
reason, anyway).

> Belden cables and Canare RCA connectors get the most recommendations. Some specific models for raw components:
>
> a.. (#1 Recommendation) Belden 1694a - "HDTV/SDI Precision Video RG6" - $166 for 500 feet
> a.. http://www.markertek.com/Product.asp?baseItem=BL%2D1694...
> b.. Turns out this is the same cable that xxx A/V expert recommends!
> b.. Belden 1865A - "Sub-Miniature Precision Video RG59"
> c.. Belden 1505A - "Precision Video RG59"
>
> d.. (#1 Recommendation) Canare RCA connector for RG6 - $2.80 each
> e.. http://www.markertek.com/Product.asp?baseItem=RCAP%2DC5...
>
> f.. Belden 7710a - "Precision Video RG6, 3 strand"

RG6 and RG59 are used for the connection from your antenna to your tuner.
For that application RG6 is the better choice, especially for longer
runs of cable, but either one will work.

For connecting your video tuner (set top box) or DVD to your display, you
could use this kind of coax, but it would be rather inconvenient because
of its stiffness. A good basic component cable like they sell at Walmart
will give you the same quality with more convenience and for less money.

If you're planning to run a component connection a long way for a
permanent installation, then this kind of coax might make some sense.
Anonymous
July 20, 2005 9:39:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Mon, 18 Jul 2005 21:01:19 -0600, "bearman" <noyb@home.com> wrote:

>
>"Randy Sweeney" <DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:p umdnfx3muEt_kHfRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Jack Ak" <akjack@excite.com> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>>What I am saying is that EVERY point of ohmic connection is a potential
>>>>source of failure and are best avoided.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> In my 28 year career as an Electronic Engineer and experience as an
>>> amateur radio operator, I've never seen the term "ohmic connection"
>>>
>>> Maybe that feature is unique to the Monster Cable brand.
>>
>Maybe it means that the connection is resistive and not inductive or
>capacitive.

Searching Google for the term "ohmic" reveals the word is used
to describe "metal-semiconductor contact with very low resistance
independent of applied voltage..."

The term is use specific with semiconductors according to several
references I read.

This link shows a page discussing the advantages of "ohmic heating"
as compared to microwave heating...
http://www.agctr.lsu.edu/en/communications/publications...

It appears the word "ohmic" has various usages.
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 1:52:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 14:52:52 -0400, "Randy Sweeney"
<DockScience@yahoo.com> wrote:

>I would not... connections are bad. They are points of possibility for
>impedance mismatchs and losses and should be minimized.
>
>Best to get the right connection on the right end and avoid adaptors.

I've had lots of success soldering RCA connectors to RG59 and Minimax
type coax cables. My solder connections are as good as anyone working
at the monster factory.

I've only tried to solder an RCA to a RG6 once, and for some reason
the sheild wouldn't take the solder, it just wicked it away. I ended
up using a F-Connector to RCA adapter and the system is working fine.

Although connectors and adapters are potential points of failure, I
don't stress over it too much due to my experience in the field with
the reliability of these connections. I always give my connections
the wire wiggle test to see if the signal is disturbed.

As far as low buck video wires, I would probably run RG59 or Minimax
in my personal system due to flexibility and solderability issues of
RG6. In my previous post I was trying to make a point that cheap RG6
is probably every bit as good as a monster cable and probably 1/20th
the price.

- Jeff
Anonymous
July 21, 2005 2:02:00 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 23:37:53 -0400, Jim Gilliland
<usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote:

>For connecting your video tuner (set top box) or DVD to your display, you
>could use this kind of coax, but it would be rather inconvenient because
>of its stiffness. A good basic component cable like they sell at Walmart
>will give you the same quality with more convenience and for less money.

I'd wager that a Walmart Special component cable would be lesser
quality than 3xRG59 or 6. Cable is a bit like a water pipe. RG6 is
like a huge pipe, with enough room for 100+ Channels of analog TV,
100+ of Digital TV, Internet and Phone to fit down at the same time.
It is totally overkill for a video signal, but it's cheap does a great
job.

>If you're planning to run a component connection a long way for a
>permanent installation, then this kind of coax might make some sense.

Like to a projector or a plasma on the other side of the room from
your AV rack.
July 21, 2005 6:54:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 23:37:53 -0400, Jim Gilliland
<usemylastname@cheerful.com> wrote:


>> a.. RG59 and RG6 are 75 ohm; video applications are 75 ohm
>
>True.
>
>> b.. RG58 and RG8 are 50 ohm; audio applications are 50 ohm
>
>False. 50 ohm wire is used for baseband ethernet and for many radio
>applications. Characteristic impedance isn't an issue for audio frequencies.
>

I think he's referring to the difference between say a video cable and
an audio cable on a composite input three wire set. The video is/was
75ohms and the audio cables were 50ohms. I think manufacturers just
made them all the same after awhile and you either get three audio
cables or three video cables depending on how bad the manufacturer is.

I looked in my cable drawer and I had one old composite cable set that
actually had a big thick video cable with two mating thin audio
cables.

The rest were all the same cables on the sets.
Anonymous
July 24, 2005 4:01:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Higher quality cables do give you better quality. They don't have to be
Monster cables and frankly for the price I would advise you to buy some
other brand.

--
Jeremy
On the web at
http://home.insightbb.com/~gamejunky/
"Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>
>
> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
> Thanks.
>
July 24, 2005 6:51:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

"Game Junky" <gamejunky@insightbb.com> wrote in message
news:QTAEe.200436$xm3.44724@attbi_s21...
> Higher quality cables do give you better quality. They don't have to be
> Monster cables and frankly for the price I would advise you to buy some
> other brand.
>
> --
> Jeremy
> On the web at
> http://home.insightbb.com/~gamejunky/
> "Son Of Sheep." <sheep.com.au> wrote in message
> news:al1gd1plenjdi8ts6nqhf799iimuqr3k0b@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>>
>> iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>> componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>> get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>>
>> Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>> colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>>
>> If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>
>

The difference for me was the Monster signal was less detailed than the $15
DVI.

BC
Anonymous
July 25, 2005 9:11:24 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Jim Gilliland:
> The difference between spools of coax are insignificant. I wouldn't mix
> brands or varieties, but even that won't have a noticeable impact.

Not mixing spools is a traditional practice, and we've been seeing enough
variation in practice (we have techs in the R&D lab qualifying cables that
we might source for HP product) that the traditional practice seems wise.

>> b.. RG58 and RG8 are 50 ohm; audio applications are 50 ohm
> ... Characteristic impedance isn't an issue for audio frequencies.

I checked with our EE's, and they agree with your statement. I drew the
comments out of seeminly well informed USENET/AVS-Forum. The bigger issue is
using 50 ohm for video.

> Nonsense. It's convenient for them to all be the same length, but varying
> the length won't have any impact on your signal quality (within reason,
> anyway).

Some USENET/AVS-Forum postings were very forceful on this point, while the
EEs around me (in discussions months ago) weren't ready to agree that
"within an inch" was necessary.

Thomas Gilg
Anonymous
July 25, 2005 9:11:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Thanks for the reply. Your remarks below make it much easier for us to
come to agreement.

news.cup.hp.com wrote:
> Jim Gilliland:
>
>>The difference between spools of coax are insignificant. I wouldn't mix
>>brands or varieties, but even that won't have a noticeable impact.
>
> Not mixing spools is a traditional practice, and we've been seeing enough
> variation in practice (we have techs in the R&D lab qualifying cables that
> we might source for HP product) that the traditional practice seems wise.

I have no problem at all going along with "wise". Your original post
made it sound like you considered it to be required. I agree that it is
wise, but I wouldn't want anyone to think that wide variations between
spools of the same cable were common. Most cable manufacturers have
reasonably tight control over this sort of thing.

>>> b.. RG58 and RG8 are 50 ohm; audio applications are 50 ohm
>>
>>... Characteristic impedance isn't an issue for audio frequencies.
>
> I checked with our EE's, and they agree with your statement. I drew the
> comments out of seeminly well informed USENET/AVS-Forum. The bigger issue is
> using 50 ohm for video.

Video and digital audio are carried over 75 ohm coax. Substituting any
other wire will result in transmission problems. So again, we're in
agreement.

>>Nonsense. It's convenient for them to all be the same length, but varying
>>the length won't have any impact on your signal quality (within reason,
>>anyway).
>
> Some USENET/AVS-Forum postings were very forceful on this point, while the
> EEs around me (in discussions months ago) weren't ready to agree that
> "within an inch" was necessary.

Well, we're talking about the timing of the individual pixels of the RGB
signals that feed an HD display. So, yes, the timing is somewhat tight.
Still, an inch of cable would add perhaps 100 picoseconds to the
transmission time, yet it would take a delay around 100 times larger than
that to affect your image quality. That's based on some quick and dirty
calculations, so don't take my numbers as being precise.
Anonymous
July 26, 2005 2:34:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.tv.tech.hdtv (More info?)

Cabling can be used to tweak your video or sound on high end systems and
with a trained ear and complete knowledge of your reference material.

But in the Monster target market I would shop for quality connectors
with good cabling. There are many out there under the Monster price point
that are just as good as Monster brand...

But it's false to say that very high quality cabling is completely a
waste on
high quality systems. But you are up near the diminishing return region...

Son Of Sheep. wrote:

>Monster Cables anyone using any any difference at all ??
>
>iam thinking of getting some for my HD PC to HD Tv connection some
>componet cables. Just want the best picture i can get. Not going to
>get the REALy expensive cables just the 200 Aussie dollar ones.
>
>Ive read that they work better with HD and you notice the qiality
>colours sharpness much more with HD over SD.
>
>If you think iam wrong let me know :) 
>
>Thanks.
>
>
>

--
Ric Seyler
!