|
31 of 37 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great cables, horrible price, July 9, 2004
By A Customer
I haven't actually owned these Monster Video 2 Component cables, but I did own the Monster Video 3 Component cables which run for about 100 bux for the same length. If you're going to run all over these cables and pound them with hammers then these cables are wonderful. But if these cables sit quietly behind your audio and video equipment then these cables function as well any other component video cable. Whether or not you really see a big difference in picture quality will depend on your setup. For example, my TV is a JVC rear projection that upconverts all video to 1080i so that the use of component connections at 480p is not a very big difference in picture quality. And of course your dvd player should have progressive scanning if you want to capitalize on the benefits of component connections to begin with. Also, having the same manufacturer for your TV and DVD player tends to yield better results in general. The point being that all of these others factors and more will determine the quality of your video much more so than any 'special' cables. The cables do no work, they are just a medium that signals must pass through. Hence, the better cables are the ones that preserve the 75 ohm signal without distortion. But this is precisely the problem with ALL component cables that use RCA interconnects. The physics of the RCA connection do not allow for the ideal 75 ohms to pass through unmolested by interference, regardless of how great the cable is or how much it costs. In fact, the implementation of RCA interconnects was never intended for video use. It began as an audio solution and manufacturers gradually implemented it instead of the BNC interconnect because of cheaper costs and user familiarity. In the end, I don't think these more expensive cables make a noticable difference in performance. For that matter, I don't see why people prefer to use toslink (optical) over digital coaxial. The toslink is much more unstable and sensitive to movement even though it's not susceptible to electrical interference since it uses light (but using light also requires the hardware to do more work in translating the signal). Point being that the audio quality is identical, but the toslink just costs more. Here again, the cable is not 'special', it only acts as a medium for signals to pass through, your actual equipment does all the work. So the ultimate question: Is it justifiable to spend so much more money on these high-end cables? Sure it is, in the same way some people choose to buy a Rolex over a Timex.
|
Saving...
