As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Monster HDMI Cables: The lies continued?
Wezoin
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
We all know Monster cables are terribly overpriced, as can be observed here, here, and here.
Now, when you go into a futureshop or bestbuy, and buy any home theatre equipment, the staff will pretty much insist you buy one of these Monster HDMI cables, telling you all sorts of stuff about how other brands just can't compare. With these claims, many people have pointed out that since HDMI is a digital format, there is no way for distortion to occur. There have been several studies proving this, such as one by CBC Marketplace, and others that were posted on the forum before but I can't find now.
Other sketchy stuff with HDMI has come in the form of Futureshop having HDMI comparisons in their stores, claiming to be using monster cables, that didn't actually use monster cables. As well as one in which they compared a Monster HDMI cable to a generic brand composite cable, claiming both to be HDMI. (Again, can't find the source right now, but it has been posted here before)
Now Monster and Futureshop are retaliating with the following websites: Monster Site , Futureshop Site. So, essentially, is there actually a difference between HDMI cables? Or are these sites just a continuation of the lies?
tl;dr: Futureshop/Monster claiming theres a huge difference between HDMI cables, even between those within the Monster brand. Check out the sites at the bottom of the post, is this stuff true, or just the same old garbage they've always been feeding us?
Now, when you go into a futureshop or bestbuy, and buy any home theatre equipment, the staff will pretty much insist you buy one of these Monster HDMI cables, telling you all sorts of stuff about how other brands just can't compare. With these claims, many people have pointed out that since HDMI is a digital format, there is no way for distortion to occur. There have been several studies proving this, such as one by CBC Marketplace, and others that were posted on the forum before but I can't find now.
Other sketchy stuff with HDMI has come in the form of Futureshop having HDMI comparisons in their stores, claiming to be using monster cables, that didn't actually use monster cables. As well as one in which they compared a Monster HDMI cable to a generic brand composite cable, claiming both to be HDMI. (Again, can't find the source right now, but it has been posted here before)
Now Monster and Futureshop are retaliating with the following websites: Monster Site , Futureshop Site. So, essentially, is there actually a difference between HDMI cables? Or are these sites just a continuation of the lies?
tl;dr: Futureshop/Monster claiming theres a huge difference between HDMI cables, even between those within the Monster brand. Check out the sites at the bottom of the post, is this stuff true, or just the same old garbage they've always been feeding us?
Wezoin on
0
Posts
that said, i'd wager the HDMI standard has been designed pretty damn well, and in such a way that unless you wrapped your cable around a big old electromagnet three times between your ps3 and your tv, or something equally profane, you wouldn't get much that could affect the stream. i doubt the materials used in production of the cable itself could make a difference in anything but extraordinary circumstances
But with HD cables, there really can't be any differene now that your transmitting a digital signal. Yes, it is possible that really bad cables might introduce reflections or group delay, or might act as an antenna picking up interference or what not, but this will mean that your signal won't be decoded at all (or will just be partially decoded). It won't leave you with blurrier images, and duller colors, you'll just end up with static. You can see this for yourself if you have an HD signal being transmitted over radio. You can use a short, cheap piece of wire as an antenna, and you'll still get a good quality image.
bottom line: Only bother buying expensive cables if you're going over 35 feet from a janky-ass Samsung player and you've already tested the cheap cables and found them not to work.
However, this is typically not an issue for most people in most situations. Where it can occur is when you have a long cable that's spooled up and poorly shielded, or where they're running alongside other unshielded cables. And the longer the run, the more interference.
Now, the catch to all of this is that for it to really be an issue you need to have long runs of poor quality cable. MOST cable, even cheap cable, isn't poor quality. I have some audio cable that is fantastic -- supple, strong, well shielded, and avoids getting twisted/knotted. It cost more than Radio Shack cable, but it's definitely better stuff. Monster? Well, it's well shielded but that's about it. And most cheap cable is shielded enough, too, to avoid pretty much all interference.
If you were running HDMI cable around a microwave a few times you might have reason to suspect some interference. But in most home audio setups, you would have to purposefully try to introduce digital noise to the setup.
So then there is a difference between HDMI cables then? And that, although the degredation may not be noticeable over short distances, the monster cables are actually of a higher quality, but because HDMI cables are already of a high standard the difference is only noticeable over a very long cable?
Actually, towards the end, he mentioned that trying a second 50' from Monoprice got rid of the issue, so the cable was just "bad."
Though how many of us would ever use a 50' HDMI cable is beyond me...
And also, the device you're sending from makes much more of a difference than the cable you're using. The PS3 has a higher signal strength than that shitty Samsung player they tested with.
But really, always go with the cheap Monoprice cables, and only go with anything higher quality if those don't work.
(sidenote: who needs a fifty foot length of HDMI cable, anyway?)
I have a seven dollar HDMI cable hooking my PS3 up to my TV, and the picture looks fucking fantastic. Even if Monster made a difference, $190 is not worth whatever that difference is.
Two dollars.
Looks beautiful.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Got my 1m HDMI for AU$6.50. Works perfectly
Maybe if you were running it 200 feet, through a microwave, cordless phone, and a partical accelerator, then I could see there being a problem.
4 feet from your TV though? Yup, overpriced to hell.
I have no use for an HDMI cable and I almost feel obligated to buy that.
Same.
As others have said, either a long cable length, excessive interference, or both. It's entirely possible, though. Again, repeating what others have said, digital doesn't automatically mean it will work. It also doesn't necessarily mean you'll either get picture or nothing (there are many digital applications where this is true, not sure if HDMI is one of them). I'm pretty sure if the bit error rate gets too high on something like compressed video, you'll often just see artifacting or macroblocking or crap like that.
But yes, Monster HDMI cables are a ripoff. And for a 3' to 4' run, pretty much any cable that isn't actually defective will probably work just fine.
XBL - Follow Freeman
Gold corrodes less than other commonly used metals. Not that that happens much, the prong connectors are considerably hueg with more surface area than compared to say internal connectors in your computer, where it's not too uncommon to see gold plating. I suppose it would be handy on a boat on salt water. So yeah, pretty much useless.
I think the new scam at the big box stores is to rag on the overpriced Monster cables, and then sell the slightly-less-overpriced house brand as the "cheap" alternative. Paying $60 for an HDMI cable is better than paying $100, I suppose, but it's still a massive rip-off. And of course, the house brand are identical to the $2 monoprice cables...
> turn on light
Good start to the day. Pity it's going to be the worst one of your life. The light is now on.
the cables I used were like $5 monoprice things, and in my field tests there is NO quality difference between my backyard hackjob and the 50' Monster I had the "pleasure" of reviewing.
If the HDMI connection is using HDCP encryption it will be an all or nothing deal.
But the masses are so ignorant about cables that they believe anything the guys at Best Buy tell them. I remember browsing the game section and some guy was trying to convince his wife/girlfriend that he needed to get these $80 component cables for his 360. The system that comes with component cables. He said he needed them for High-Def, because the included cables couldn't do that.
Oh, I can guarantee you they don't. I had a biscuit at Circuit City tell me years ago, with all honesty, that there's a difference between audio CD-R's and data CD-R's.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Well, to be fair, he might have gotten a core.
Just bought 2 ...one for 360 one for cable box too the plasma
Now, normally, I stay out of these things, but after his female companion walked off, I asked him if he had a Core or a Premium. He had the Premium, and was aware that he already had component cables, but he was convinced that he couldn't get HD unless he payed $80 for new cables.
Since then, I have resumed my previous policy of not getting involved.
On my employee discount it was like $30. I bought it because it has a massive amount of outlets on it, and with about 6 different consoles, it came in handy.
Okay, yeah... he's just a goddamn moron.
Of course theres a difference, 'Audio CDs' are about 25% more expensive.
At my job I flat out tell people that theres no difference and yet they still buy the 'Music CD-Rs' because "They say 'music' on the packaging!"
But meh, whatever, digital is on or off...
I always wondered about that shit. The first time I saw them I thought "Audio CD-R?? WTF DOES THAT MEAN" (Office Space reference) and then I'd just buy the regular shit because I figured it had to be a gimmick.
Someone tried to tell me that some CD players wouldn't play music burned on data CD-Rs, but music CD-Rs were designed to work with all CD players.
Back then, I used to have a portable CD player (when your average mp3 player only held like 10 songs). So I took my data CD-R out of my Discman* and popped it in one of the store's boomboxes. Low and behold it played music. Instead of admitting defeat, he claimed that there are dual-mode CD-Rs that are often labled as data, but the only way to be sure you were getting one that would work in CD players was to buy the audio ones.
*
Discman.
Also, I apologize for italics abuse.