A wire hanger showed an identical connection to a Monster cable in testing.
A wire hanger opens up to what? 3 feet maybe. That's way too short to get a discernable difference. Like I said in a earlier post, 100 ft is the magic number. Most cables will appear identical in lesser than 100 ft applications. A lower quality cable will start showing its inferiority in longer applications. Nightclubs, and concert sound systems need high quality cables, but I'm sure they use a manufacturer other than Monster.
This coming from the company who claims no product in any category and regardless of date of origin may use the word Monster. They probably spent more time filing lawsuits over mini golf and muffin companies over the word than any R & D, as if they could in a million years prove they caused confusion with their product. Telling the Boston Red Sox they can't refer to their legendary Green Monster left field wall in their merch? Seriously?
<p style="margin-bottom:0px;margin-left:0px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:0px;padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-top:0px;"> Their frivolous and abusive lawsuits are legendary. This is just another. </p>
$100 for a 10 foot cable that is no better than a $10 cable is AMMORAL
Are they no better? From what I've read they aren't worth the money because the result is either na imperceptible or no difference in the data being delivered to your screen and speakers, but that the cables themselves are actually better than cheap cables that are given away by electronics and by cable/sat providers.
At the core this argument isn't any different than one arguing that a more expensive car is pointless if a cheaper car can still get you from point A to point B safely and reliably. Not everyone needs additional shielding of cables, less impurities for less impedance, etc. so there are likely few that would likely need anything over the basic cable offered, but there are times when a higher quality cable is required. In fact, higher quality cabling is how we're able to get such fast speeds over Ethernet (and other) cables and yet these are indistinguishable without looking at text printed on their sheathing.
Are they no better? From what I've read they aren't worth the money because the result is either na imperceptible or no difference in the data being delivered to your screen and speakers, but that the cables themselves are actually better than cheap cables that are given away by electronics and by cable/sat providers.
At the core this argument isn't any different than one arguing that a more expensive car is pointless if a cheaper car can still get you from point A to point B safely and reliably. Not everyone needs additional shielding of cables, less impurities for less impedance, etc. so there are likely few that would likely need anything over the basic cable offered, but there are times when a higher quality cable is required. In fact, higher quality cabling is how we're able to get such fast speeds over Ethernet (and other) cables and yet these are indistinguishable without looking at text printed on their sheathing.
What makes a cable better than another isn't always about transmission of data, but of shielding it from outside interference. Most short cables will not be susceptible to interference. The 6' HDMI cord given to you by the cable/sat company is just as good as the expensive ones.
My thoughts exactly. It's hard to imagine a less scrupulous company in the world of audio equipment. Monster is known primarily for pawning gold plated cables to suckers at insanely high prices which have been proven to offer zero benefits over cables costing less than $10.
And Beats sells overpriced crap too. No difference. Chunky plastic body over a $25 speaker at most. Bogus.
And Beats sells overpriced crap too. No difference. Chunky plastic body over a $25 speaker at most. Bogus.
Wrong. Beats isn't tricking anyone. They designed fashionable headphones with mediocre performance which people willingly pay top dollar for, without Monster's deceptive sales and marketing. Beats headphones are part tech and part fashion. Monster cables offer nothing but a false promise of superior performance.
Most cables will appear identical in lesser than 100 ft applications.
Uh… news flash, but 98% of all consumer and business cables only exist in <100’ situations.
A lower quality cable will start showing its inferiority in longer applications.
I bought a 1,000’ spool of Cat6 from Monoprice and that sucker worked as beautifully as anyone could imagine. Hundred bucks. I could buy Vatican City for what that would have cost me from Monster.
Uh… news flash, but 98% of all consumer and business cables only exist in <100’ situations.
I bought a 1,000’ spool of Cat6 from Monoprice and that sucker worked as beautifully as anyone could imagine. Hundred bucks. I could buy Vatican City for what that would have cost me from Monster.
Wrong. Beats isn't tricking anyone. They designed fashionable headphones with mediocre performance which people willingly pay top dollar for, without Monster's deceptive sales and marketing. Beats headphones are part tech and part fashion. Monster cables offer nothing but a false promise of superior performance.
Comments
Apple cables are a rip-off too, but at least they're high quality.
Debateable.
Not free. Haha.
There's no morality in business. High end cables does have its applications, but most people don't have those needs.
A wire hanger showed an identical connection to a Monster cable in testing.
A wire hanger opens up to what? 3 feet maybe. That's way too short to get a discernable difference. Like I said in a earlier post, 100 ft is the magic number. Most cables will appear identical in lesser than 100 ft applications. A lower quality cable will start showing its inferiority in longer applications. Nightclubs, and concert sound systems need high quality cables, but I'm sure they use a manufacturer other than Monster.
Are they no better? From what I've read they aren't worth the money because the result is either na imperceptible or no difference in the data being delivered to your screen and speakers, but that the cables themselves are actually better than cheap cables that are given away by electronics and by cable/sat providers.
At the core this argument isn't any different than one arguing that a more expensive car is pointless if a cheaper car can still get you from point A to point B safely and reliably. Not everyone needs additional shielding of cables, less impurities for less impedance, etc. so there are likely few that would likely need anything over the basic cable offered, but there are times when a higher quality cable is required. In fact, higher quality cabling is how we're able to get such fast speeds over Ethernet (and other) cables and yet these are indistinguishable without looking at text printed on their sheathing.
What makes a cable better than another isn't always about transmission of data, but of shielding it from outside interference. Most short cables will not be susceptible to interference. The 6' HDMI cord given to you by the cable/sat company is just as good as the expensive ones.
Vedy interesting.
Stealing is stealing. Forget their cables as they are irrelevant in this matter.
And Beats sells overpriced crap too. No difference. Chunky plastic body over a $25 speaker at most. Bogus.
And Beats sells overpriced crap too. No difference. Chunky plastic body over a $25 speaker at most. Bogus.
Wrong. Beats isn't tricking anyone. They designed fashionable headphones with mediocre performance which people willingly pay top dollar for, without Monster's deceptive sales and marketing. Beats headphones are part tech and part fashion. Monster cables offer nothing but a false promise of superior performance.
Uh… news flash, but 98% of all consumer and business cables only exist in <100’ situations.
I bought a 1,000’ spool of Cat6 from Monoprice and that sucker worked as beautifully as anyone could imagine. Hundred bucks. I could buy Vatican City for what that would have cost me from Monster.
Monoprice rocks.
Ditto.
Monoprice rocks.
Yep.
If true then why haven't they been sued?