Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.


Photo
- - - - -

Monster Cable at it again.


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 of 36 OFFLINE   troy evans

troy evans

    Screenwriter



  • 1,294 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 02 2005

Posted March 19 2008 - 05:02 PM

Has anyone else here seen this bullshit: Monster Advanced For HDMI So, now we have "highspeed" HDMI. Man, anyone who falls for this has thier brain dial set to "stupid." Anyway, this gave me a laugh. When will Monster stop trying to rip off consumers?
" I think it's time we go to plan B". "What's plan B?" "That's the one where we don't do something stupid".

#2 of 36 OFFLINE   allprolab

allprolab

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 58 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 2008

Posted March 20 2008 - 12:22 AM

I am brand new to HDMI and would like to not be one of the fools. So can you inform someone like me what would be considered the proper HDMI cables? Is spending more pointless?

#3 of 36 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted March 20 2008 - 01:15 AM

HDMI is an all digital signal with proper error checking, so you either get the entire signal or you get a degraded signal that is quite evident, usually showing as massive sparkling on the display leading to no picture at all. Basically, an HDMI cable either works or it doesn't, you can't get a "better quality" picture from HDMI, unless "better quality" means watchable vs. unwatchable. Don't tell that to Monster, they don't like to hear it. The "high speed" BS is more of the same. They allude to improvements in picture quality due to the "High Speed" capabilities of their $200+ cables, when the same capabilities can be built into a $10 cable. For a good price on quality HDMI without breaking the bank, try Bettercables.com or Monoprice.com. You can equip your entire setup for less than the price of one Monster HDMI cable and have the same quality picture.

#4 of 36 OFFLINE   chuckg

chuckg

    Supporting Actor



  • 917 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 27 2004

Posted March 20 2008 - 02:25 AM

Why oh why didn't HDMI just use a cat-5e ethernet cable with RJ-45 plugs? Heck, you can send data at over 100 Gb/s that way..... And, if HDMI was split into audio and video components over separate connections, we wouldn't have to figure out how to get sound to one box while picture goes to another...
--ignore the man behind the curtain

#5 of 36 OFFLINE   allprolab

allprolab

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 58 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 2008

Posted March 20 2008 - 04:08 AM

Well I think I ripped myself off. I bought a hdmi monster cable for $70. I truly had no idea I was paying too much. It's a rookie mistake I'm not making again.

#6 of 36 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted March 20 2008 - 04:44 AM


Don't blame yourself. I know people who have decades of time and hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in their A/V hobby who, even after being shown the irrefutable proof that HDMI is an all or nothing transport, still believe the hype (*cough* fraud *cough*) foisted by Monster and other (believe it or not) even more expensive "boutique" cable companies. Scary thought, but there are other companies out there whose marketing campaigns label Monster's prices as "entry level".

I guess that 1000%-5000% profit margin has to go somewhere. Posted Image

#7 of 36 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted March 20 2008 - 04:52 AM

By the way Pete, don't buy into Monster's hype about "Digital" audio cables either. For digital coax, the SPDIF specifications were actually designed for a simple 75 Ohm yellow ended RCA video cable and for optical, I've used a $10 Walmart special for going on 10 years. This assumes a DD/DTS signal. PCM brings up concerns of jitter, which is a whole 'nother argument (and will bring the "golden ears" folks out like ants to a picnic Posted Image).

#8 of 36 OFFLINE   troy evans

troy evans

    Screenwriter



  • 1,294 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 02 2005

Posted March 20 2008 - 06:53 PM

You wanted the best. There's no fault in that. Many people, when new to home theater, make this mistake. I did it myself. You spend money buying the best equipment you can and using the old "you get what you pay for" mentality you do the same with interconnects such as component, fiber optic and HDMI. Monster counts on the ignorance of new consumers. I believe they are the companies bread and butter. Once you know that the difference isn't there it's easy to make the right call. Not many newbies know this, though. That's the reason why this forum is so important. New consumers who come here first get the lay of the land and advice from some of the best. Recently, I read here that a test was done using coat hangers instead of wires( I believe for speakers) and audiophiles couldn't even tell the difference. Some people who would swear there is a difference in cables from Monster and other comparable cables from other companies are wrong. Some people believe if somethings more expensive it must be better. I know differently and now so do you. Welcome to the world of the HTF HDMI informed, my friend.
" I think it's time we go to plan B". "What's plan B?" "That's the one where we don't do something stupid".

#9 of 36 OFFLINE   allprolab

allprolab

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 58 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 16 2008

Posted March 21 2008 - 12:31 AM

Yeah, live and learn. No biggy. I am happy to say all the optical audio cables I've bought were cheap ones. That makes me feel a bit better. Heh.

#10 of 36 OFFLINE   Mjorgensen

Mjorgensen

    Extra



  • 20 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 17 2006

Posted March 21 2008 - 10:02 AM

Well each person has their own take on cables in general but I have been able to hear differences in cables when I have tried them back to back. Granted it was not a double blind test but the changes were there for me. The cheaper cables like the ones that come with the equipment were "dull" compared to better cables such as the Monsters. I have even been able to demo a couple super high end MIT and Transparent audio and video cables loaned to me by a store. I could hear things different be it the sharpness of the voices or the sizzle of the high hat. There are even bass notes that are muddy with some, thin with others and then some that seem to get it just right. People can argue all day about how cables are all the same and I for one believe there is a limit I am willing to pay for a cable for anything. The fact is though I "think" I an hear differences and if the cable is not too expensive for me I would buy it. The other reason I like nice cables is because this is also a hobby, the same way people buy polished aluminum parts for the car or fancy wheels. This just shows your taste and pride in your choices. It is not always about performance but choice.

#11 of 36 OFFLINE   Lew Crippen

Lew Crippen

    Executive Producer



  • 12,060 posts
  • Join Date: May 19 2002

Posted March 21 2008 - 11:25 AM

There is a difference in the question asked (about HDMI) and speaker cables. Did your blind test include switching back and forth from a high-end HDMI cable to an inexpensive one? That is a blind test that I’d be very surprised if the results were repeatable.
¡Time is not my master!

#12 of 36 OFFLINE   troy evans

troy evans

    Screenwriter



  • 1,294 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 02 2005

Posted March 21 2008 - 06:19 PM

There are some conflicting points here. It's always about performance. If you're buying expensive cables based on how they look and not on how they perform, then you're wasting money. People shouldn't be able to see your cables in the first place. Having cables in clear view where everyone can see them would look like shit, no matter how pretty they are. I need my cables to do one thing, perform the best job transfering data from point A to point B. Lower cost cables that perform every bit as good as Monster will be my choice all the time. The money you save not buying Monster cables can be put towards something truely beneficial, like better speakers or a better receiver. Now, that's something that would make a hell of a difference in performance.
" I think it's time we go to plan B". "What's plan B?" "That's the one where we don't do something stupid".

#13 of 36 OFFLINE   mylan

mylan

    Screenwriter



  • 1,686 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 06 2005

Posted March 22 2008 - 01:30 AM

I've been taken by Monster twice before I began reading,the first time it was a $100 fiber optic cable that promised to eliminate interference (its light folks, no RF or EMI) and the second it was a $100 HDMI cable. Yes, its built very well, so well in fact, that the heavy ends sometimes sag and come loose from the back of the TV. Both of these connections are digital and do not require the type of overbuild and shielding that Monster claims, just like The Who says, I won't get fooled again and to claim that you can hear a difference in most cables is just silly.
I know enough to know I don't know enough!

#14 of 36 OFFLINE   gene c

gene c

    Producer



  • 5,797 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 05 2003
  • Real Name:Gene
  • LocationBay area, Ca

Posted March 22 2008 - 03:31 AM

Whether it's Marketing, consumerism or psychology, sometimes we spend more on things just because it makes us feel better. The mind is a tricky thing and even if I know there isn't much of a difference in performance I'm willing to pay a bit more (but not a lot) for peace of mind. I certainly won't spend $100-150 on an HDMI or $75 on a fiber optic, but I'm not about to hook up my cherished equipment with the cheapest things I can find either. I try to find good quality at a fair price. Regardless of brand.
"Everyday room": Panasonic 58" Plasma, Dish HD DVR, Pioneer Elite vsx-23, BDP-23 BR, dv58avi universal dvd player, Paradigm Studio 20 V1, CC-450, Dayton HSU-10 subwoofer.

"Movie/Music room": Toshiba 65" DLP, Dish HD receiver, Marantz 7005, CC-4003, BD-7006, Polk LSI25's-LSi7's-LSiC, 2 original Dayton 10" "Mighty-Mites" subwoofers. (subject to change without notice).
 
Also have  MB Quart Vera VS05 +.....too much to list. Help me.
 
 

 


#15 of 36 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,636 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted March 22 2008 - 04:28 AM

What it shows is that you like the "jewelry" aspect of High End Audio, as in "Look at me! See how pretty my stuff is! See how much money I have to spend!" I do wish people were more honest about this sort of thing, and admit that they're buying based on looks, without trying to claim "superior" performance.

#16 of 36 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted March 22 2008 - 05:08 AM


Dress these babies up with brushed aluminum sleeves and you have pretty and cheap->Warning: Contains Sacred Golden Eared Cow Skewering!!

#17 of 36 OFFLINE   willyTass

willyTass

    Second Unit



  • 374 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 09 2005

Posted March 22 2008 - 05:31 AM

You mean Mr lee can't get electrons to travel faster? No....

#18 of 36 OFFLINE   gene c

gene c

    Producer



  • 5,797 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 05 2003
  • Real Name:Gene
  • LocationBay area, Ca

Posted March 22 2008 - 07:23 AM

Looks always play at least a small part in my decision when buying stuff. Mostly for quality reasons (it "looks" like it's made from better materials) but sometimes for appearance (my Swans put a smile on my face just by looking at 'em). And I've seen some cables that are so ugly I'd never buy them. Don't care how cheap they are or how well they perform. Don't want those things in my house! How's that for honesty Posted Image .
"Everyday room": Panasonic 58" Plasma, Dish HD DVR, Pioneer Elite vsx-23, BDP-23 BR, dv58avi universal dvd player, Paradigm Studio 20 V1, CC-450, Dayton HSU-10 subwoofer.

"Movie/Music room": Toshiba 65" DLP, Dish HD receiver, Marantz 7005, CC-4003, BD-7006, Polk LSI25's-LSi7's-LSiC, 2 original Dayton 10" "Mighty-Mites" subwoofers. (subject to change without notice).
 
Also have  MB Quart Vera VS05 +.....too much to list. Help me.
 
 

 


#19 of 36 OFFLINE   Jeff Gatie

Jeff Gatie

    Lead Actor



  • 6,531 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 19 2002

Posted March 22 2008 - 07:32 AM


Fixed it!! Posted Image

#20 of 36 OFFLINE   gene c

gene c

    Producer



  • 5,797 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 05 2003
  • Real Name:Gene
  • LocationBay area, Ca

Posted March 22 2008 - 09:04 AM

I was walking a fine line there and you just pushed me off it! Posted Image (im-proper use of the banana but who gives a s#$%&) Besides, you only fixed the cause. The effect is still there. Or is it the other way around? Posted Image . I'm so confused Posted Image .
"Everyday room": Panasonic 58" Plasma, Dish HD DVR, Pioneer Elite vsx-23, BDP-23 BR, dv58avi universal dvd player, Paradigm Studio 20 V1, CC-450, Dayton HSU-10 subwoofer.

"Movie/Music room": Toshiba 65" DLP, Dish HD receiver, Marantz 7005, CC-4003, BD-7006, Polk LSI25's-LSi7's-LSiC, 2 original Dayton 10" "Mighty-Mites" subwoofers. (subject to change without notice).
 
Also have  MB Quart Vera VS05 +.....too much to list. Help me.
 
 

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users