BlueJean Cables vs. Monster Video 3 (1 Viewer)

[Matt D K]

How good are the BlueJean RGB video cables? How about compared to the MonsterCable Video 3 line? I am using them between my JVC progressivi scan dvd ant Hitachi 57swx20b as well as my HiDef digital cable box. Any real difference at all? Also how are there single cables for subwoofer use?

Thanks in advance
Matt

 

[Bob McElfresh]

Short Answer: People have said they noticed a improvement using the better Belden or Canare based cables over Monster 3. My guess is that BlueJeans offering is closer to the Monster CV300 cables which sell for about $220 for 6 ft.

Long Answer:

The professional grade cables usually have tables of specifications to help a tech/engineer select the right coax for their application. Monster however thinks the consumer is too dumb to understand this info and refuses to publish specs for the Video 1/2/3/CV300 cables. (This alone makes me not recommend Monster )

Take a look at this:



(This happens to be the frequency-response graph for Canare HD coax).

First question: What is the highest frequency you want to shove down the wire?

Here are the max frequencies for video in your system:

Component Video: 4 Mhz
Progressive Video: 13 Mhz
1080 HD Video: 35 Mhz

Take the max frequency and double it or even quadruple it. If we do this for 1080 HD video we get something like 140 Mhz.

Now look at the chart. The question to ask is: "Can this coax handle 140 Mhz with a 3db or less reduction (attenuation)?"

From the chart you see that the blue or green line crosses the 3 db line at almost exactly 150 Mhz. Either of these would work for HD video.

Even the red line (V-5CFB) would work because we have a 4X factor built in and all of these numbers are measured for a 100 ft cable. (Your mileage will likely be better).

But what about Blue Jeans Cable

They use Belden 7710A coax. The Belden web site does not have nice graphs, but they do have a table of data for this
7710A RGB/Component Cable

NOM. ATTENUATION:
MHZ DB/100 FT. MHZ DB/100 FT.
----- ---------- ----- ----------
1 .24 180 2.42
3.58 .45 270 2.97
5 .54 360 3.43
7 .63 540 4.25
10 .72 720 4.95
67.5 1.57 750 5.00
71.5 1.60 1000 5.89
88.5 1.75 1500 7.33
100 1.84
135 2.10
143 2.16

Look at where the signal drops/attenuates by 3 db: 270 Mhz. It's well above our target of 140 Mhz with the 4X factor built in.

Now lets look at Monster Video 3:










(ha ha, made you look. Monster wont publish specs)



Because of this lack-of-information, no professional who knows what he is doing (or not getting $$$$ from the sale of Monster) would install Monster cables in a mastering/recording studio.

So what are you going to put in your home?

 

[steven pm]

If I understand this, even roughly, these charts are indeed in terms of db loss per 100ft. SO, for a typical 6-10 ft. cable, plus your 2-4x factor, aren't these cables overkill? Wouldn't lesser cables (even Monster 3's that have nominally acceptable characteristics at a minimum) bbe perfectly fine for short runs?

 

[Chu Gai]

a pretty good question steven. bob, are you aware of any instrumental comparisons involving nominal lengths of 'top performing' cables vs lesser ones? would seem to be an easy thing to do. after all, photography magazines run these kinds of things on lenses, films, and papers all the time.

 

[Tony Baker]

I just received my 30 foot component cables from Blue Jeans this week and could not be happier. If I were going with shorter runs, I might have considered lower quality cables. I also thought about making my own. In the end, it turned out cheaper to buy them from Blue Jeans. They also ship very fast.

 

[Lee Bailey]

I switched from Monster Video 3 Component Cable to the Blue Jeans Component Cable with only a 6ft run, and the improvement was noticable. Used to be grainy, and now it is not. This was my experience.

Monster markets to the mass consumer. Their interconnects are adequate, though not the best price/performance units out there. IMHO