Cables: Composite x Component. Monster Cables 2 x 3, any difference?

1

19woodybr76

Audiophyte
Hi folks,

I've bought a plasma tv, Pioneer PDP434 PG 43, and a dvd player with component video inputs/outputs. Since people have warned me that without video component cables my "plasma experience" wouldn't be complete, I'm now faced with the doubt of investing or not in these type of accesories. So if anyone could shed a light on the subject I would be very grateful. I have 3 questions:

1st question: is there a significant difference in terms of image quality between one home theater set using simple composite cables and one using component cables, is it worth the investment?

2nd question: Is there any noticeable difference between Monster Cable 2 and Monster Cable 3?

3rd question: is it recommended to have audio cables integretated in the video component set. Will it be any better than the others?

I understand some people in the forum are not very fond of Monster Cable, which is perfectly understandable, but I am just mentioning them due to the fact that I've been recently introduced to the world of "audioholics" and using Monster Cable seemed to me as a good basis for comparison.

Cheers.
 
M

markw

Audioholic Overlord
19woodybr76 said:
1st question: is there a significant difference in terms of image quality between one home theater set using simple composite cables and one using component cables, is it worth the investment?.
Unless there as problems with the cable or the shielding is inadequate, most likely not. It's all basicaly short runs of 75 ohm coaxial cable. Good 75 coax need not cost a fortune.


19woodybr76 said:
2nd question: Is there any noticeable difference between Monster Cable 2 and Monster Cable 3?.
Maybe in the appearance and the price. There's no scientific basis for any.


19woodybr76 said:
3rd question: is it recommended to have audio cables integretated in the video component set. Will it be any better than the others?.
huh?

You might wantto explore the topics under the "Get an A/V Education" at the upper left side of this site. http://www.audioholics.com/
 
1

19woodybr76

Audiophyte
markw said:
Unless there as problems with the cable or the shielding is inadequate, most likely not. It's all basicaly short runs of 75 ohm coaxial cable. Good 75 coax need not cost a fortune.


Maybe in the appearance and the price. There's no scientific basis for any.


huh?

You might wantto explore the topics under the "Get an A/V Education" at the upper left side of this site. http://www.audioholics.com/
Well, I had browsed it indeed but couldn't find the answer nonetheless. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. In question #3, I was referring to something like this: "Monster Component Video 1/Interlink A/V Connection Kit" (http://www.monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1521)
 
L

Leprkon

Audioholic General
Component video is generally a much cleaner signal than composite.

If you, as mentioned before, you get a decent 75 ohm shielded cable, you can go to Walmart and get the same quality as Monster XXX or Monster XXX+1 or Monster XXX+2 or Monster XXX Ultra or Monster Quad X

either these:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=1717306&cat=4537&type=19&dept=3944&path=0:3944:133276:133270:4537

or the Phillips Gold series (basically same price) are sold at most nearby Walmarts, and, if you don't tell anybody they came from Walmart, no one would ever guess (or know that you saved a ton of bucks compared to their Monster cables).

if you need longer runs, try Impact Acoustics, Parts Express, or Blue Jeans cables.

Monster doesn't make bad products, they just charge you out the whazzou for them. You won't get any better quality just by paying for their brand name. If you really need to feel like you "paid" for Monster quality cables, price them out against the product lines above and give the difference to your local animal shelter. At least then, some good would come out of the extra.
 
M

markw

Audioholic Overlord
Oh, I see...

19woodybr76 said:
Well, I had browsed it indeed but couldn't find the answer nonetheless. Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. In question #3, I was referring to something like this: "Monster Component Video 1/Interlink A/V Connection Kit" (http://www.monstercable.com/productPage.asp?pin=1521)
It's just their way of making it easier to buy all Monster brand products.
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
19woodybr76 said:
1st question: is there a significant difference in terms of image quality between one home theater set using simple composite cables and one using component cables, is it worth the investment?
Yes, there is a tremendous difference between composite video and component video. Your DVD player will only transmit progressive scan video across the component output, so set your DVD player to progressive output and hook up some cheap (NOT MONSTER - TO MUCH $$$ FOR WHAT YOU GET!!!) but decent quality component cables. Try www.bluejeanscable.com

19woodybr76 said:
2nd question: Is there any noticeable difference between Monster Cable 2 and Monster Cable 3?
No, there are very few cables that will show a visible difference in video quality, especially on short runs. Even those 'freebie' cables that come with your equipment may look identical to $100.00+ cables from Monster and other companies.

19woodybr76 said:
3rd question: is it recommended to have audio cables integretated in the video component set. Will it be any better than the others?
It doesn't matter if audio cables are integrated. Usually they are not, but it really isn't a huge matter as far as I am aware. What DOES matter is using DIGITAL audio out of your DVD player. Also, look into HD cable or at the very least digital cable, and make component video hookups and digital audio hookups. That'll give you the most out of your system to start with.

I don't have anything against Monster, but just like Bose, there are far better ways to make use of your $$$.
 
M

markw

Audioholic Overlord
one teeny point here...

BMXTRIX said:
Yes, there is a tremendous difference between composite video and component video.
As far as the signal goes, no doubt. A component signal had dang well be better than a composite signal.

But somehow I think he might be more interested in the differences between an official "composite" video cable and one designed specifically for "component" video.

And, aside from perhaps the colors on the RCA plug, I can't think of any...
 
BMXTRIX

BMXTRIX

Audioholic Warlord
markw said:
As far as the signal goes, no doubt. A component signal had dang well be better than a composite signal.

But somehow I think he might be more interested in the differences between an official "composite" video cable and one designed specifically for "component" video.

And, aside from perhaps the colors on the RCA plug, I can't think of any...
That wouldn't be typical. Most people don't understand that component actually looks far better than composite and is required (at the very least) for true HD viewing.

A component cable is 3 composite cables. They are all 75ohm cables. There is no difference at all in the cable - none. But, because component uses 3 75ohm cables it can carry a lot more data, without the same problems that composite has. Cable = identical - Image = Far better w/component.

I could be wrong though - won't know until the original poster responds.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top