The great Monster debate continues.
My easiest analogy is the strength meter on your HD receiver. If you are getting a 60-70 strength signal, the sound and picture will lock and you will have an enjoyable viewing experience. Now if the signal was 99, that would equate to absolutely no increase in audio or video quality. This is a digital signal, either it's there or it's not.
Of course, the 99 signal will resist rain fade better than to 70 signal, but remember, the signal is travelling 50,000 miles to get to you (for satellite). The connection from the receiver to the monitor is often 4 feet or so. I would venture that 75% of all connections are certainly less than 6 feet. (I know there are exceptions, but as a general rule, this is true.) It also has never rained in my living room, certainly not between my receiver and TV. The difference between a 'generic' cable and a Moster cable for digital signals is somewhere in the magnitude of 99.0 % vs. 99.99% (being generous to Monster). There is absolutely no difference in signal at the monitor, regardless of gold connections or whatever enhancements Monster sells. (Corrosion aside, I have yet to have any signs of it on my digital equipment. If you live in an area that it is common, this is a good consideration.)
I have yet to hear of anybody being able to distinguish a difference in double-blind tests. I have tried many times with friends of mine that are absolute Monster snobs. I went so far as to take my receiver and TV to a friends house (same TVs) and it still went as I expected. The reason some makers like Monster quote technical specs is because that is the only distinction. It is not truly visible.
It somes down to; If someone is asking on a forum if it is worth spending more for Monster cables versus using the supplied cable (or a no-name cable), my answer will always be to not buy the expensive cables. This is usually a newbie question and not a real videophile (yet). If you want to find out for yourself, find a store that will allow you to return Monster items, buy a Monster there and do your own comparison. If you 'see' a better image with Monster and it's worth the price, keep it. In most cases, if you are being honest, the generic cable will be every bit as good.
If I spend a couple thousand dollars on a HD TV, that is not license to rape me for cables. If you feel good paying 5x for cables (or 15x or more) and it's not taking food off your table, go for it. I'm just not buying into it. I would rather donate that money to my favorite forum dedicated to HD, that's why I'm a Proud Supporter. For the value I have received from this board, the donation is a drop inthe bucket. [/blatant commercial]
My easiest analogy is the strength meter on your HD receiver. If you are getting a 60-70 strength signal, the sound and picture will lock and you will have an enjoyable viewing experience. Now if the signal was 99, that would equate to absolutely no increase in audio or video quality. This is a digital signal, either it's there or it's not.
Of course, the 99 signal will resist rain fade better than to 70 signal, but remember, the signal is travelling 50,000 miles to get to you (for satellite). The connection from the receiver to the monitor is often 4 feet or so. I would venture that 75% of all connections are certainly less than 6 feet. (I know there are exceptions, but as a general rule, this is true.) It also has never rained in my living room, certainly not between my receiver and TV. The difference between a 'generic' cable and a Moster cable for digital signals is somewhere in the magnitude of 99.0 % vs. 99.99% (being generous to Monster). There is absolutely no difference in signal at the monitor, regardless of gold connections or whatever enhancements Monster sells. (Corrosion aside, I have yet to have any signs of it on my digital equipment. If you live in an area that it is common, this is a good consideration.)
I have yet to hear of anybody being able to distinguish a difference in double-blind tests. I have tried many times with friends of mine that are absolute Monster snobs. I went so far as to take my receiver and TV to a friends house (same TVs) and it still went as I expected. The reason some makers like Monster quote technical specs is because that is the only distinction. It is not truly visible.
It somes down to; If someone is asking on a forum if it is worth spending more for Monster cables versus using the supplied cable (or a no-name cable), my answer will always be to not buy the expensive cables. This is usually a newbie question and not a real videophile (yet). If you want to find out for yourself, find a store that will allow you to return Monster items, buy a Monster there and do your own comparison. If you 'see' a better image with Monster and it's worth the price, keep it. In most cases, if you are being honest, the generic cable will be every bit as good.
If I spend a couple thousand dollars on a HD TV, that is not license to rape me for cables. If you feel good paying 5x for cables (or 15x or more) and it's not taking food off your table, go for it. I'm just not buying into it. I would rather donate that money to my favorite forum dedicated to HD, that's why I'm a Proud Supporter. For the value I have received from this board, the donation is a drop inthe bucket. [/blatant commercial]
