Let's look at component video cables (1 Viewer)

[Carlo_M]

I too want to say a bit of thanks to Chu for his comments (and heavens knows I don't agree with him on everything). All too often HT becomes a sort of religious thing with some people swearing by this, and not by this. It's good to get some hard numbers (though any good statistician knows you can make numbers lie too!) in here as well as subjective results.

What I value most about Chu is that he presents a dissenting opinion to the manufacturers who are in the business of...well...getting business. Sure some are more trustworthy than others (I trust Ron and Tom of SVS for example), but never forget a businesses' #1 priority - to make money in order to stay in business.

Chu's dissents are what makes a place like HTF a valuable resource for me as a consumer of HT goods. His voice (postings, actually) echo through my head when I'm walking down the aisles at certain stores reading about why I should buy this $300 cable or accessory rather than the $20 on the next shelf. It's that kind of balance that I value, and I don't think Bettercables or any other sponsor of HTF should fear this kind of post.

HTF has not, in the past, bowed to studio pressure--we call out the studios when they make bad product, and yet they still send our reviewers products for review. Just because MGM screwed up Real Men doesn't mean I'm boycotting all MGM products. And just because Monster Cable is, IMO mostly marketing fluff and overpriced, doesn't mean I won't buy BJC (and their stuff does look pretty good to me). If I buy an ICBM I sure as hell ain't gonna send back the Bettercables that come with it just because of something Chu posted!

So to me, both sides have an appropriate place in HTF and I would be sad to see either one go. It's all about balancing different opinions and experiences in order to make choices at the checkout stand.

 

[Chu Gai]

Well you know, it's much easier to step up to the plate, like the gentlemen from SVS, when you've got an arguably good product such as they have. I've never found them shirking from comments and lord knows there's been a few good broadsides leveled at them. Many of their replies are helpful, informative, and at least in my opinion, they don't lie or distort the truth. Now we can debate which is the better sub, SVS or HSU or take your pick, and that can be fun.
I have no issue with a person's desire to overspecify a particular product. I do though think it's worthwhile to consider the question "What do I need to get the job done" to have more merit than "What's the best cable". The first question will objectively set out the criteria that must be met in order for something to meet its design objectives. Once you know that, then by all means you can prioritize what it is that you the consumer feel is 'best'. If it's crimp RCA's go for it. If it's locking ones, then so be it. You want a cable with tighter impedance specs or one with the lowest return loss...sure, they're out there.

I do have issues with flaky, poorly designed, irreproducible, uninformed testing methodologies. I've got issues with periodicals that continue to promulgate those methods for they do no favor to the consumer. It's bad enough I've got every level of government with their hands in my wallet and phony charities with 99% administrative costs telling me i should care about this or that. I don't need make believe pseudo science with their preachers who if they saw an equation that described a circuit would find their eyes glazing over.

People should question stuff and not get wrapped up in Chevy trucks are built like a rock, or Ford Tough, or Dodge Rams. A nice 5mph smack will tell you how tough these rams and rocks are. You don't need to spend a lot to get cables that exceed your needs and it doesn't matter whether it's a Pioneer DVD player or something from Levinson. That is, unless the Levinson is so poorly designed that it has issues with cables. Stuff like that happens you know.

 

[Ted Lee]

i also wish to thank chu for his time and efforts. i pretty much find that i agree with what he has to say. i feel he has a "common sense" approach to this stuff, which is quite refreshing.

keep it up chu, i'll never put ya on my ignore list!

 

[wayne p]

There can be no argument with Chu's bottom line.

1) Know the task you wish to complete.
2) Identify the range of products that meet those needs.
3) Purchase/make the product from within that group that turns your crank.

The problem with this is that it requires the consumer to make an effort to inform themselves. It is so much easier to look at the pretty pictures in magazines and accept what is written.

Wayne P

 

[Steve>Smoker]

My take on this is that really the physical cable (as long as its of a sufficient CSA) really doesnt have much at all to do with it.

Its the connections.

How one peice of copper can be any better than another is really beyond me.
Its all just electrons moving through a peice of metal.
Theres all this OFC business and 'How Big' etc - but I fail to see how overly-big CSA can actually improve signal quality unless its over really long runs.
Quality is about not introducing noise as far as I was aware.


So now we have the bandwidth discussion - surely bandwidth is only limited by the narrowest point in the cable ?

In my experience (14 years of analogue/digital signal transmissions in heavy industry) 99% of the problem are down to either bad installation design (ground loops or poor shielding) or more commonly the quality of contruction/installation.

Like any mass-produced item, some sets are going to be better than others.
The sets made straight after the machines are calibrated will be the best, down to the sets made just before re-calibration the worst.

Seems all cables are NOT created equal.
Even if theyre in the same box.

So how do you guarantee quality ?


Make them yourself ??

Hehe ... just a few thoughts.

 

[DaleBesh]

You raise good points, Steve. Yes, connections are very important, as are the termination points especially on RF cables. At those frequencies how far back the cable is stripped, and even how long the center conductor extends into the connector shell can be critical.
Pin retention is another factor. Especially on mutli-pin designs like S-Video which have no real captive solution such as screws or clips to ensure good alignment and that the connector will not work itself loose over time.
Often in those cases, the the problem can be the mating connector (back of the TV, receiver, etc.)
Basically, I look for cables that are priced within scale for my system, I look for solid construction/workmanship. (That is not to say you will see or hear a difference but I rather pay for quality). Although, not to beg the point, but a visual difference, in my experience, would certainly be easier to verify with any kind of repeatable results.
The chances are there will not be differences. A least not significant enough to justify spending a lot more money for one brand over another.
To increase consistency, making your own would certainly be a good path. But only if you have good soldering skills, etc.
There are firms that do not 'advertise' results with flashy promos, etc. that can build cables for you using perferable stock like Belden and Canare. Again, the big variable can be the skill of the assembler.
I think for most people, mass built cables like Monster or the Radio Shack Gold series, etc., will suffice for most anything.
I do not know how you could realistically or practically, validate any claims made by cable salons, published reviews, let alone get any insight to their testing methodology.

 

[Chu Gai]

I'm not so sure that the statement "make it yourself" leads to a consistently better product. If anything, hand made will lead to greater variability with a greater probability of out of spec material. Now a Rolls is one hell of a sharp looking car and I'm sure the person who drives it or has it driven for him might not care so much about a trip to the repair shop, but quality wise, I certainly don't find the Rolls on the JD Edwards list. Just look at some of the work done by Demming in Statistical Quality Control. There's a reason the Japanese, after WW II, made automobiles with greater reliability than Detroit. It wasn't because of hand made either.

As far as mass produced cables, it doesn't bother me too much and when it comes time for me to replace my spark plug wires, i don't think i'll be turning to handmade. If you're doing the work yourself, one can certainly build fine super-spec cables for a fraction of the cost. Techflex manages to hide quite a bit of errors of commission.

 

[DaleBesh]

Well, of course and you could also make your own consistently good or consistently poor depending on your skills. It is only an option.
Actually, it mattered a lot to me in an RX-7 getting brand-name Bosch replacements or going to Mazda to get factory replacements.
With the Bosch the wires lit up like a Christmas tree as the car lost power.
That was a case of major supplier using the same basic construction for all applications and only worrying about length and termination.
The factory replacements were designed specifically with more insulation solely for that application. Not quite the same category we are discussing here, but it did induce a fair amount of noise into the radio.

 

[Chu Gai]

well again, one needs to determine what the requirements are with regards to the wires. total resistance, resistance/foot, spiral wound, all that stuff. i'll bet the bosch application chart listed their suitability and all i hope is that you got your money back. might've been better off if you were looking to switch to consider the various performance versions that are out there. it really depends on how much you want to dig to get the correct information and find out the manufacturer's specifications. sometimes that's best found out on enthusiast's websites and places like that. if you were modding the thing and had something like an MTD ignition system and all that, it might help to get an appropriate wire suitable for the increased voltages. BTW, how do you like the new RX8's?

my point with regards to hand made vs machine is largely limited to people making hundreds if not more of cables. the scope though I think is beyond where this thread started.

 

[DaleBesh]

I agree, custom applications that require long runs, etc. certainly require more consideration.
I like the RX-8, and I understand there is even a hotter version in the wings, more like a true 2 seater replacement for the sports car.
There was a problem where the HP rating of the RX-8 was found to be 5% less than advertised. This was a conversion problem from the Mazda plant to Ford who produced the brochures. Ford offered to refund recent customers 100% for vehicles as they are turned in, and make other allowances to earlier buyers.
The RX-7 enthusiasts are a loyal lot, and they have been waiting a long time for the return of the rotary to these shores, they were not happy. Of course, most of us were not happy when Ford assumed the reins and Mazda was no longer the company they used to be.
But overall, it looks like no one messed with their engineering.

 

[Steve Bruzonsky]

Chu, I must commend you for an excellent post and an excellent thread.

Not that Chu and I haven't had our differences. But frankly, that's when I moderated Tweaks at AVS Forum and heck, I got crap from tweakers, non-tweakers, nothing I moderated made folks happy. After four years I stepped down from that gig about six months ago and can' say I miss it.

And Chu has mentioned in this thread something about a cable company at the AVS Special Guest forum that I still moderate. However, that is a unique forum, where by the rules you ask guests questions, but you don't debate them (or hardly anyone would ever be a guest). Chu was permitted to ask the question, but not to challenge and debate any responses because that's just how that forum is.
And let it be known that even I pull my debates at times on that forum.

Anyway, Chu has really made a valuable contribution here discussing video cabling. But I think there's something that perhaps hasn't been discussed enough - that 75 ohm impedance through and through the cable and connectors is how video cabling and digital audio cabling is engineered and designed, there just ain't no technical arguments against this. But a good share of the more expensive "boutique" video cabling out there simply ain't 75 ohms, sometimes way off the mark.

How do I know this? Well, noted Electrohome guru Tim Martin has been saying this for years. Same for Electrohome board mod guru Mike Parker. But I personally experienced this the other year when our Az Audiophile Society had access to a Time Delay Reflectometer, members brought their video cables and digital audio cables, and we tested them on the TDR, which gives you impedance vs the entire length of the cable. As a general rule, I would say the more expensive, the more "boutique" the cable, the poorer the performance.There were exceptions. But let this be a warning. As Chu said above, companies that handmake their video cables all too often don't have good quality control - even if they spec 75 ohm, that doesn't mean that's what they get. Too often the connectors ain't 75 ohm, either. Now Belden and Canare mass manufacture and are very precise with top quality control so you can be reasonably assured that their cables and connectors are as speced.

What I learned from our demo is their are even many audiophile digital audio cables sold that don't meet reasonable tolerance for 75 ohms and sure, they may sound "better" perhaps to some of us - but all their doing is changing the sound from what was intended in the first place when they don't meet the most basic objective spec, 75 ohms impedance.

You don't see any home theater mags anymore test for 75 ohm impedance on cables. Why?? Maybe because it might be a problem attracting cable advertisers????

If you are considering a "boutique" digital audio or video cable, see if the specs or info even mention 75 ohm - often it won't. What does that tell you?

And even if it does mention 75 ohm - if its not made from say Belden or Canare 75 ohm cabling, its probably not 75 ohm, unless you have a company having top notch proper design and manufacturing quality control. I know of one company marketing its own "boutique" digital audio and video cabling which TDRs the wire after it is produced by the mill and this stuff is 75 ohm through and through. But this is the exception, not the rule.

Some companies have their own proprietary video cable and say its 75 ohm. But just cause they say it doesn't mean a thing. For example, one company takes 75 ohm copper Belden cabling, and by hand removes the copper and inserts silver. Do you believe that will be 75 ohm cabling - no way? In fact, I mentioned to the guy the need to TDR the cable to ensure 75 ohm performance. His response - what's a TDR.

Just a little food to CHU on. Thanks again, Chu.

 

[Chu Gai]

Yeah, it's a bitch wearing the moderator's hat Steve but personally, I like it when manufacturer's step up to the plate and take good swings at tough pitching. The Larry King approach just doesn't work for me. I'll have more to comment on later regarding some of the comments you made.

 

[RobertR]

Very nice post, Chu. I read the (VERY detailed) spec sheet for Belden 1694a cable, found it at a reasonable price, and bought it for my projector. It was fascinating to me that the specs for 1694a are as good (or even better) in EVERY respect than the most expensive BC video cable, which sells for 4 1/2 times as much.

 

[JamesGL]

Chu, thanks for the info.

Does this mean a Monster Standard Cable (Monster's entry level cable) is more than enough to connect my HK AVR630 to a NAD T532 then to a JVC WS 56" RPTV?

Time to return them Monster "THX" cables I suppose.

 

[Chu Gai]

I've no idea what Monster's standard cable is. Consider though, that there's tons of off-the-shelf, double and triple shielded, RG59 types available, and that they're dirt cheap. When you're looking at nominal lengths, more money gets you nicer looking stuff. I'll be the first to admit that those connectors on the bottom end stuff look cheesy and that there's something to be said for a nice looking and well made Canara RCA, but it's not necessary unless you want it to be. When you've got money up the wazoo you can buy anything you want. When you're on a fixed budget as most of us are, you just might find that saving a few hundred on cables, lets you buy a beefier amp, or maybe entertain the idea of monoblocks powering everything, or getting those speakers that you really wanted. The cable could give a rat's ass if your DVD player cost you $100 or $3000. If you're pushing 37 MHz, you're pushing 37 MHz. I will say though, that when you start looking at some of the limited-edition, audiophile, I turn my nose up at your Burr Browns and Crystal DACs, designer DACs sometime you need to rething matters a bit. Not because they're higher (put your favorite qualifying word here) but because sometimes it happens that they actually do a piss-poor job of designing the circuitry so that it becomes load-dependant. IOW, they're so badly designed that a little bit of capacitance hurts their performance. However, that's never stopped StereoPhile from giving an A rating to a poor product, has it?

 

[JamesGL]

I would post links to the Monster Standard Cable but won't let me since I am still a newbie.