Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    911

    Testing the Monster Cable Hypothesis

    My Leo curiosity got the better of me but I don't have anything to lose here. It was basically unanimous throughout this board on 2 different threads that using Monster Ultra (priciest) cables will have minimal noticeable effect in terms of sound and picture quality and I'd be wasting my money buying them. Anyway, Frys in LA, the biggest electronics place I've ever seen, has the deal that you can return anything within 30 days and get youir full money back, so I decided to see and hear for myself, and will report the results sometime later on this board, either today or tommorow. I realise anything I say that might be positive, if applicable (no pun intended) is subjective and is my opinion only. If the stuff does sound better in my opinion, then I'm going to see if I can get it for alot cheaper on Ebay and then return.

  2. #2
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    911

    Ultra Monster Cable Operation Was A Success But The Patient Died

    Well I conducted my unscientific tests with the Ultra Monster Cables. The results fit in the operation was a success but the patient died category.

    SUBWOOFER CABLE: Basically, I compared my THX subwoofer cable to the Ultra THX subwoofer cable by playing the same tracks of the same CD with the exact volume, EQ settings, everything the same except the subwoofer cable. I originally was going to play several CD's as I didn't think I was going to hear any difference based on AudioReview Forums comments. Wrong! The results were like being just a little bit pregnant. The bass sound coming out of the subwoofer using the Ultra THX cable was significantly different than that coming from the THX cable but unfortunately that was not a good thing. Specifically the bass sound the Ultra THX produced was a louder more in your face less richer type sound then that produced by my my THX subwoofer cable. For my personal tastes I preferred the sounds coming from my original THX subwoofer cable as the bass sound was a more subtler richer sound which is how I prefer to hear bass. The CD I tested was the Beatles Revolver. I was planning to test more but based on my initial result I did n't see the need.

    Ultra Audio Cables to connect my TV to my receiver (specifically Monster Interlink400mkII- a similiar cable to the Ultra Audio Cable). I've just been using a cheap pair of ordinary RCA plugs to connect to my receiver so I can hear the TV from my 6 speakers (including sub). Again the difference was significant, but again not for the better which totally shocked me as I thought anything would be an improvement over my basic cheapo RCA Cables. Specifically, the sound of the Monster audio cables while al little louder and more pokey were slightly muffled and not rich while the sound from my RCA cheapo cables were natural and rich. I tested this on 4-5 different television shows, playing both on each one.

    I couldn't test the video as I bought the wrong cable- a composite instead of an S Video. Based on the results I've noted, my S Video cable is THX, I'm not even going to buy an ultra S Video cable and will be retunring all this stuff within the week. I guess the grass is always greener on the other side!


    Quote Originally Posted by hershon
    My Leo curiosity got the better of me but I don't have anything to lose here. It was basically unanimous throughout this board on 2 different threads that using Monster Ultra (priciest) cables will have minimal noticeable effect in terms of sound and picture quality and I'd be wasting my money buying them. Anyway, Frys in LA, the biggest electronics place I've ever seen, has the deal that you can return anything within 30 days and get youir full money back, so I decided to see and hear for myself, and will report the results sometime later on this board, either today or tommorow. I realise anything I say that might be positive, if applicable (no pun intended) is subjective and is my opinion only. If the stuff does sound better in my opinion, then I'm going to see if I can get it for alot cheaper on Ebay and then return.

  3. #3
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,720
    I am wondering how much bias crept into this evaluation?
    mtrycrafts

  4. #4
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    A cable test is pretty simple to do if you can control the biases by using a blind comparison. The method that I used a long time ago was to go with a monophonic source, and randomly swap off the L/R cables. This means that at any given time, you can potentially have a mismatched pair of speaker cables. Because the random pairing also includes random swaps of L and R channels, this minimizes any differences with the amp channel balance and effects of room acoustics as causal effects for any differences that you might observe.

    I can tell you that in some of my speaker cable tests, I did observe differences. But, were they big differences? Hardly. Were they even improvements? Not sure, the differences were so subtle that I couldn't tell if they were actual improvements.

    With interconnects, I think the rationale for replacing the OEM cables is that they typically come with poor build quality and don't always fit well. In my old system, they consistently picked up interference that introduced audible noise into the signal. Going with the most basic higher quality interconnect greatly reduced the noise. And with one step up on the S-vid cable, it visibly improved the image from my satellite box. Before with the OEM cable, I picked up visible ghosting on the image, which went away after swapping out the cable. I don't think the cable itself makes much difference, but going with better constructed connectors with better shielding definitely helped in my case.

  5. #5
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    911
    Huh? Whatever you said is above me but I was shocked that the sound quality to me was noticeably worse for my personal tastes with the much more expensive and supposidly higher grade Monster Ultra Cables. Maybe if I had tried to re eq my speakers for the Ultra Cables I would have loved the sound but that's not where my head was at. I expected to hear no noticeable difference at all in the sound at all the same levels and when there was an obvious immediate difference it wasn't to my personal tastes at all. I don't understand how these cables could make the sound quality so much worse. But then again, maybe somebody who loves a booming bass unremitting unslot in your face would think it was great.
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    A cable test is pretty simple to do if you can control the biases by using a blind comparison. The method that I used a long time ago was to go with a monophonic source, and randomly swap off the L/R cables. This means that at any given time, you can potentially have a mismatched pair of speaker cables. Because the random pairing also includes random swaps of L and R channels, this minimizes any differences with the amp channel balance and effects of room acoustics as causal effects for any differences that you might observe.

    I can tell you that in some of my speaker cable tests, I did observe differences. But, were they big differences? Hardly. Were they even improvements? Not sure, the differences were so subtle that I couldn't tell if they were actual improvements.

    With interconnects, I think the rationale for replacing the OEM cables is that they typically come with poor build quality and don't always fit well. In my old system, they consistently picked up interference that introduced audible noise into the signal. Going with the most basic higher quality interconnect greatly reduced the noise. And with one step up on the S-vid cable, it visibly improved the image from my satellite box. Before with the OEM cable, I picked up visible ghosting on the image, which went away after swapping out the cable. I don't think the cable itself makes much difference, but going with better constructed connectors with better shielding definitely helped in my case.
    Last edited by hershon; 07-30-2004 at 06:28 AM.

  6. #6
    Loving This kexodusc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Department of Heuristics and Research on Material Applications
    Posts
    9,025
    Most differences I've noticed can be attributed to the connectors. I performed my own experiment with 3 Monster sub-woofer cables of various different price categories, and the first thing I noticed is the tighter fit at the terminal.

    Basically what I noticed was the cheaper sub cable had a looser fit, sometimes the sub wouldn't even pick up the signal and power on so I had to wiggle/rotate the cable end a bit. The dealer threw it in with the sub when I bought it...now I know why he gives them away.
    The next step up fit a bit tighter, and that problem went away...the really stupid expensive one I bought used fit the tightest, and I did notice a slight volume increase on my SPL meter (though I did move a bit after switching cables so there is room for error) but nothing in terms of sound improvement.
    Confirming my suspicions, I bought some cheaper cables from Parts Express with nice fat connectors on them, and lo and behold, they also outperformed my original Monster cable, and sounded as good to me as the other two at a lower cost.
    I even cut up two of the Monster cables to look at what was inside them. Different plastic shielding I think, the wire itself looked the same. I'm no expert though.

    The local Best Buy salesguys sell Acoustic Research cables to most of the customers. I've seen them save a few people some money offering to do a/b comparisons with their Monster cables. The customer gets the same quality connection, and saves a few bucks. Kudos to them. (though I wonder if there's some kickback involved?)
    Another Best Buy I visit every so often claims the buyer will notice a 20-30% improvement in sound with Monster over AR and other generic cables....Holy Jebus!!! Why drop an extra $400 into a new, bigger receiver when you can spend $400 on cables and get a 200% improvment?

    I don't think there's anything wrong with Monster, but I think you can buy the same quality cable for alot cheaper and lose the brand name.

    My biggest disappointment with cables is the lack of empircal evidence supporting their claims. To me the proof is in the pudding...if you can't back up what you say with something more than testaments from parties with vested interests, I don't want to hear it. Even Pepsi has documented, indisputable proof from independant parties that slightly more people prefer the taste of Pepsi than Coke...doesn't translate into sales or popularity, but at least it's SOMETHING.

    Funny thing is, some people could perform the same primitive test I did and come out with a completely different conclusion in favour of expensive Monster Cables. What can you do?

  7. #7
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by hershon
    Huh? Whatever you said is above me but I was shocked that the sound quality to me was noticeably worse for my personal tastes with the much more expensive and supposidly higher grade Monster Ultra Cables. Maybe if I had tried to re eq my speakers for the Ultra Cables I would have loved the sound but that's not where my head was at. I expected to hear no noticeable difference at all in the sound at all the same levels and when there was an obvious immediate difference it wasn't to my personal tastes at all. I don't understand how these cables could make the sound quality so much worse. But then again, maybe somebody who loves a booming bass unremitting unslot in your face would think it was great.
    Like I said, try the test blind using a monophonic CD and randomly switched mixed pairings. You need someone at the back end swapping out the cables at random, and do the listenings without knowing which cable you're listening to. In a sighted comparison test, the natural bias is to expect that you will hear something different. I've done blind tests before, and I can tell you that diffferences that seemed huge under sighted conditions are much less noticeable if you do the listening without knowing which cable you're trying out.

    If you detect booming bass with only one cable, then you should double check the level using a SPL meter and test tones. If the levels measure identically, then you need to do a blind listening because what you hear might be influenced by knowing that a different cable was used.

  8. #8
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by hershon
    Huh? Whatever you said is above me but I was shocked that the sound quality to me was noticeably worse for my personal tastes with the much more expensive and supposidly higher grade Monster Ultra Cables. Maybe if I had tried to re eq my speakers for the Ultra Cables I would have loved the sound but that's not where my head was at. I expected to hear no noticeable difference at all in the sound at all the same levels and when there was an obvious immediate difference it wasn't to my personal tastes at all. I don't understand how these cables could make the sound quality so much worse. But then again, maybe somebody who loves a booming bass unremitting unslot in your face would think it was great.
    Like I said, try the test blind using a monophonic CD and randomly switched mixed pairings. You need someone at the back end swapping out the cables at random, and do the listenings without knowing which cable you're listening through. In a sighted comparison test, the natural bias is to expect that you will hear something different. I've done blind tests before, and I can tell you that diffferences that seemed huge under sighted conditions are much less noticeable if you do the listening without knowing which cable you're trying out.

    If you detect booming bass with only one cable, then you should double check the level using a SPL meter and test tones. Boominess means that you're getting a spike at a specific frequency, and this is one of the easiest things to measure for. If the levels measure identically at all frequencies, then you need to do a blind listening because what you hear is probably more influenced by knowing that a different cable was used.

  9. #9
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    911
    I follow what you're saying but the difference was so apparent like night aand day, it had nothing to do with preconceived ideas or wishful thinking or any biasness on my part. You could hear the difference right away there was no subtle or minor differences to analyze. But as I said, for my tastes, the difference wasn't good, as I don't like in your face bass and that's what the Ultra THX brought on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    Like I said, try the test blind using a monophonic CD and randomly switched mixed pairings. You need someone at the back end swapping out the cables at random, and do the listenings without knowing which cable you're listening through. In a sighted comparison test, the natural bias is to expect that you will hear something different. I've done blind tests before, and I can tell you that diffferences that seemed huge under sighted conditions are much less noticeable if you do the listening without knowing which cable you're trying out.

    If you detect booming bass with only one cable, then you should double check the level using a SPL meter and test tones. Boominess means that you're getting a spike at a specific frequency, and this is one of the easiest things to measure for. If the levels measure identically at all frequencies, then you need to do a blind listening because what you hear is probably more influenced by knowing that a different cable was used.

  10. #10
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by hershon
    I follow what you're saying but the difference was so apparent like night aand day, it had nothing to do with preconceived ideas or wishful thinking or any biasness on my part. You could hear the difference right away there was no subtle or minor differences to analyze. But as I said, for my tastes, the difference wasn't good, as I don't like in your face bass and that's what the Ultra THX brought on.
    Like I said, the bias is that you will hear something different, that's why you need to do the trials without knowing whether or not the cable pairs got switched out. When I did my own blind trials, the differences that I thought were pronounced ended up much more subtle than I originally thought.

    Another objective way to verify a "night and day" difference is to do a straight SPL measurement of the output. For what that Ultra THX cable costs, you've nearly equaled the cost of a parametric equalizer, and with a subwoofer, it's no contest as to which component would make the most audible and verifiable difference.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. bi-wiring
    By sleeper_red in forum Cables
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-19-2004, 02:47 PM
  2. Problem with Monster GameLink 300 S-Video A/V cable
    By DavefromNJ in forum General Audio
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-18-2004, 05:03 AM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-13-2004, 11:47 AM
  4. monster cable differences
    By jmracura in forum Cables
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-04-2004, 07:59 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •