Monster Cable for analog capture and viewing

[RWANDREWS]

I find the following supplier very prompt & to have good prices. Check out

www.ramelectronics.com

for audio & video cables.

[greymalkin]

monster cable now that i think of it is alot like paris hilton.

high dollar, but really worthless.

[sanlyn]

For those who've had comments about Belkin: I tried their s-video and found the colors were "off", especially in skin tones. I've read this has something to do with uneven impedance curves, In any case, I didn't care for the cable's rendition. Others might find they're good.

As for captures: I've posted a few captures in the past, but I find that there really has to be a highly visible defect or major differences. In this case I'm talking mostly about preferences rather than obvious "defects" (except with Monster, and anyone who can't see what Monster products are doing to a picture should use whatever they want and stop worrying about it). Most differences between wire are almost always subtle, and often a matter of preference. But it is true, according to engineers and my own experience, that cable that doesn't meet at least standard a/v specs will not offer optimum performance. My experience with Belkin s-video was that it made the image look a little plastic, not quite "real". Some people prefer it. Belden (not Belkin) makes a 1695A a/v wire that appeared to look very similar to Belkin, to me. You might disagree.

I can see a difference in s-video cables from AR, Mogami, and Recoton (GE + RCA "generic" at Circuit City). My wife sez she can't tell, except that AR's seemed a bit softer when she looked at movie credits. Anyone who can't see these differences, as I say, should use whatever they want.

[edDV]

All this fine subjectivity can't be tested by a third party.

A cable has a minor role in image quality for short distance (6-12ft). The main issues are adequately noiseless contacts, a reasonable impedance match and crosstalk isolation.

Long cables have frequency response, attenuation and reflection issues.

Other issues dominate for image quality.


BTW. Belken has cable in various quality grades. Multi-million $$$ broadcast facilities use the higher grade Belkin coax cable. Their requiremnts differ in many ways from the average Home Theater.

[sanlyn]

All this fine subjectivity can't be tested by a third party.

A cable has a minor role in image quality for short distance (6-12ft). The main issues are adequately noiseless contacts, a reasonable impedance match and crosstalk isolation.

Long cables have frequency response, attenuation and reflection issues.

Other issues dominate for image quality.


BTW. Belken has cable in various quality grades. Multi-million $$$ broadcast facilities use the higher grade Belkin coax cable. Their requiremnts differ in many ways from the average Home Theater.

...And, to add to some of the quality differences mentioned by edDV and others: Belden, Canare, and Mogami sell for prices equal to or below brands like Monster and even some Belkins. The same wire is used in pro studios...but pro studios spend $5 for wire and $5000-plus for calibration equipment. Given those same resources and expertise, any home user can get supurb results from any wire that meets proscribed broadcast and recording specs for inductance, capacitance, nominal impedance at critical frequencies, etc., etc. (except Monster, which doesn't meet any known category of those specs).

What the home user is stuck with, short of spending vast sums on equipment, is how well a piece of wire matches your specific setup. I had the nominal impedance of the s-video input on my BVP-4 proc amp measured at an average 73.6 ohms by a pro technician at NBC in Manhattan. That's pretty close to the 75-ohm standard. Measure your VCR's output or your TV's input, etc., and you'll come up with a number of reasons why one wire works for your pal George but doesn't seem to ring any bells when used at your house.

The brands I mentioned are my favs because over the years, and with a wide variety of equipment and signal sources, they've given consistently favorable results. This indicates to me that those wires were designed and built within certain broadcast standards. Apparently, they were designed for home use at optimum lengths of 3 to 12 feet. Belden and Canare mentioned here were built for 100-foot runs or longer -- which probably accounts for my experience that their images seem to have washed out highlights when used in 6-foot lengths or less. I conjecture that if you hooked up 50 to 100 feet of those wires, the impedance and signal loss inherent in long lengths would cause various elements of the image to fall into spec. This is not conjecture, but is deduced from material I've read all over the Internet, and from discussions with the NBC tech mentioned earlier.

At one time the MIT cable website had a chart of impedances of several brands of s-video measured at critical translation frequencies. The impedance in those ranges should be 75 ohms. Monster products measured 30 ohms (no wonder the reds are mushy and shadows show cyan blotches, despite the fact that the image resolution itself is "sharp"!).

If Monster, Belkin, or an old shoestring gives you the results you like, you should use it. But anyone who spends more than $30 for a 3-foot to 12-foot a/v cable, or scours the world for exotic "professional" stuff that was designed for 250-foot runs, is wasting money -- unless, of course, the difference seems worth it to you. All I'm reporting is my experience.

However -- there are plenty of test charts uploaded in this forum, and I've seen one set of captures specifically directed at cable differences. Keep in mind that no one gets into a video hobby in order to make thousands of DVD's of test patterns. What the tests generally prove is how well a cable reproduces test patterns. So for those who suggested that I post captures, I'll try to look up relevant posts that already exist in this forum.

[sanlyn]

There are several posted captures (test patterns) made with composite and s-video cables in this forum at:

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=279561&highlight=

under the article title "Test Caps - various composite and s-video cables", created by BrainStorm69 (for which we all thank you). Test patterns have inspired me to choose any particular piece of wire -- a noisy VHS tape presents far greater challenges. But, of course, patterns are a start.

[SCDVD]

There are some real nut cases among audio "purists" who are fool enough to pay virtually any amount of money for cable and plug snake oil. Poke around on this web site for example and you can see first hand what sucker bait looks like!
http://xtremecables.com/ Huge Bucks - It ought to be a crime! These people are stealing money.

[Wile_E]

Here is what I currently use for capturing. Radio Shack Gold Series 3ft w/s-video Cat#15-1576 $16.99

I was lucky to get this cable. Radio Shack changed the design of this cable. The cable I got has in-line noise filters for audio, better connectors, and thicker cable. The "newer" cables are missing the noise filters, have different connectors, and slightly thinner cables. Monster Cables are really a joke, although I know several people that think otherwise. Just because something is more expensive, doesn't make it better. There is nothing wrong with the cheaper gold Radio Shack cables.

Here is my cable...

[sanlyn]

SCDVD: Ran into "xtreme" some time ago. You're right, it's a complete ripoff for both audio and video (Eichmann connectors? They still sell those things? Talk about nightmare grounding and crosstalk problems!). That goes for the garbage about silver wire, too.

Their website is aptly named.

[sanlyn]

I posted 4 captures using 4 cable brands at:

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?p=1465937#1465937

See page 2.