# Monster forgot to pay off someone



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Apparently now experts are saying that HDMI cables are all the same.



> There's lots of money in cables. Your money.
> Dozens of reputable and disreputable companies market HDMI cables, and many outright lie to consumers about the "advantages" of their product.
> Worse, the profit potential of cables is so great, every retailer pushes high-end HDMI cables in the hopes of duping the buyer into spending tens, if not hundreds, of dollars more than necessary.
> 
> Read more: http://news.cnet.com/why-all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same/8301-17938_105-20056502-1.html#ixzz1KyIUEZXO


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

The experts have always said that


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

As long as you're using good grade copper of the proper gauge and sufficient shielding/conductor protection with proper connector attachment, they should be the same.

I'm sure there are some junk cables out there that don't perform well.

But I've seen no evidence that Monster or Belkin are any better than Monoprice.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> The experts have always said that


Yeah... it's just that most people don't listen to the experts... so I'm not sure anything has changed.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

The only real difference for normal length cables is the number of conductors it has for HDMI 1.3 and 1.4 signalling. (Or so I was told by the HDMI group.) 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

for such cables is other factor also important - number of turns per foot


----------



## AttiTech (Feb 21, 2011)

:/ I just bought a monster cable from a local computer sales/repair place. 6' for $15 and I don't see any difference in the other HDMI cables I have.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

AttiTech said:


> :/ I just bought a monster cable from a local computer sales/repair place. 6' for $15 and I don't see any difference in the other HDMI cables I have.


From engineering stand point the cable never been 1x better then other with similar build. It's just a name, like Sony, for what you pay ten fold.


----------



## AttiTech (Feb 21, 2011)

P Smith said:


> From engineering stand point the cable never been 1x better then other with similar build. It's just a name, like Sony, for what you pay ten fold.


Right right. I don't mind paying for the cheap version of most anything. Certain things of course I'll purchase brand name for it, but things like cabling I never see a difference like they claim is there.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

From reading the article, and links to the tests, it would appear to be a valid claim until you go over 50', and that is when the failures of the cheaper cables started.

I would suspect anyone running over 50' would be running to a projector, so it would be quite easy to try cheap first, and if it doesnt work, return and get the next step up. 

The article and tests were quite accurate in the under 50' category. Monoprice won in the cost department with zero fails.


----------



## AttiTech (Feb 21, 2011)

Davenlr said:


> From reading the article, and links to the tests, it would appear to be a valid claim until you go over 50', and that is when the failures of the cheaper cables started.
> 
> I would suspect anyone running over 50' would be running to a projector, so it would be quite easy to try cheap first, and if it doesnt work, return and get the next step up.
> 
> The article and tests were quite accurate in the under 50' category. Monoprice won in the cost department with zero fails.


I don't think I would have any use running 50' of HDMI cable. Maybe 50' of ethernet if I ever wire my house for it, but unless I get the sudden urge to have an equipment closet, then I think it should stay where it is with 6' cables being almost to much


----------



## brant (Jul 6, 2008)

P Smith said:


> for such cables is other factor also important - number of turns per foot


i would think the numbers of turns is set by the standards committee for HDMI, just like w/ other networking cables.


----------



## Karen (Oct 4, 2007)

The only thing I really liked about the Monster cables was they didn't seem as stiff as the cheaper ones. In some cases, where there isn't a lot of room, it seemed to me like the stiff ones would put more stress on the connectors. That being said, most of my cables aren't Monster cables. <g>


----------



## HIPAR (May 15, 2005)

This has to do with transmission line theory. I've seen references to preservation of rise/fall times of the digital signals and, also, adherence to termination standards. So, you might be able to establish superiority of a particular cable through a laboratory measurement.

However, as been cited by many, in a typical application that superior cable won't affect the incidence of corrupted pixels. So, it's over designed.

I use a thirty foot long generic HDMI cable that works flawlessly.

--- CHAS


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

"Stewart Vernon" said:


> Yeah... it's just that most people don't listen to the experts...


Sure they do. To most people the guy in the blue shirt IS an expert.


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

There are several good places to get cable cheap, especially HDMI. My favorite just happens to be monoprice.com which happens to provide overnight shipping to California and portions of Nevada and Arizona residents.


----------

