marketing in cables

[Willow]

I am just curious:
how much is makerting and how much is actual.

If I was to buy a set of component cables say at 100$ what difference is there between those cables and same brand, quality video cables or for that matter RCA cable. why not buy 3 video cables....so they may not have the cool little colors on the ends to differ the 3 colors matching on the dvd player.... what is the big difference are there any differences or is it just marketing

[steveinaz]

99.5% marketing. I seriously doubt there is any significant difference other than the use of different sources for materials, etc.

[Zero]

Willow,

Your post has the makings of what typically starts off the vaunted cable debate. Hopefully we can keep this discussion civilized. Your post count indicates to me that you have read at least a few perspectives about opinions of this controversial subject. Let me fire up my response with an obvious; the truth is in trying products out personally, gaining first hand experience and knowledge.

To further examine your question, in my experience, a good portion of what you pay for in a cable is one hell of an outrageous over-head. It is no secret how over-priced most neatly packaged cables are, what retails for $100 may realistically only be worth $15-18 in materials. Pretty Teflon, cool locking pins/plugs, a cool name along with great packaging plays a huge role in the sales. Such is true with most products. Many claims of technologies are false at best – look no further than Monster Cable for such examples of bloated claims.

As for whether or not they make a difference; that is up to you, the ever curious consumer looking to extract every last bit of performance from their entertainment system. You also have to ask yourself if your electronics are up to par. Don’t expect to see much improvement in video if you are using a Mintek dvd player running component to a Bazooka Television. The same applies for audio. When shopping for cables it is best to try a variety of products and try to determine where the ends justify the means. For some, it stops at $25 radio shack interconnects and .10 cent a foot speaker wire. For others, it begins at big beefy $1000 cables.

The only way to know for sure is to try it for yourself.

Good luck.

edit; For component cables - as PolkThug suggested - 75 ohm is the standard to be at. The quality of the BCN and RCA connectors can potentially have an effect. The conductor itself will most likely be generic copper, although I've been told silver is actually better for video applications due to the despersion of skin effect. Don't ask, I couldn't tell ya - but it made sense at the time! heh.

[PolkThug]

With component cables, just make sure its 75-ohm rated and you're good-to-go.

Regards,
PolkThug

[LittleCar_w/12s]

the only difference I know of is component cables are usually made for higher freq with less loss. you might only see an improvement of pricey over cheap if you have HDTV.
-Jerry

[Willow]

thanks guys this is why I did not mention names I was just wanting to know the nitty gritty, it's pretty much what I suspected
I am not asking for why will sound better as if they are constructed of the same materials just labled and marketed differently they should sound the same. company A can take a good shielded rca coax and market it for a sub cable, dig coax, video, audio, component . but the "guts" of the cable are all the same...this is what I was heading for

[dcarlson]

If a company does what you're explaining and doesn't label them as such, IMO, it's a shady company you should stay away from.

[Willow]

I am not looking at any cables right now this hypothetical .....

[John K.]

Willow this was explained in a couple of previous replies, but the basic question in using a connecting cable is whether or not it should be of 75 ohms impedance. The answer depends on the wavelength of the signal being carried compared to the length of the cable. For digital CD output from a player an "RCA analog" cable(i.e. one not of 75 ohms impedance)is fine for that digital output for distances up to about 40 feet, which covers most home situations. For wavelengths shorter than those involved in CD(e.g. progressive scan TV, HDTV)the allowable length without matched impedance is considerably shorter so except for just a few feet a 75 ohm coaxial cable should be used.

You're correct that if it's a 75 ohm coaxial cable it makes no difference whether it's called composite video, component video, subwoofer(not all subwoofer cables are 75 ohms), digital coaxial, or whatever. If the wavelength and distance involved call for the use of a matched 75 ohm impedance cable, then that's what should be used. For shorter distances there's no problem with carrying digital or other material over an "analog cable" which might have an impedance in the area of 40-50 ohms. Either of these types of cables is available for less than $1 a foot and no factual audio engineering basis exists for exotic cables marketed at outrageously inflated prices.

[Willow]

Originally posted by John K.
You're correct that if it's a 75 ohm coaxial cable it makes no difference whether it's called composite video, component video, subwoofer(not all subwoofer cables are 75 ohms), digital coaxial, or whatever. If the wavelength and distance involved call for the use of a matched 75 ohm impedance cable, then that's what should be used. For shorter distances there's no problem with carrying digital or other material over an "analog cable" which might have an impedance in the area of 40-50 ohms. Either of these types of cables is available for less than $1 a foot and no factual audio engineering basis exists for exotic cables marketed at outrageously inflated prices.


thank you this is what I was looking for

[Tour2ma]

Originally posted by Willow
thank you this is what I was looking for Me, too... that ought to jump start the debate... (goes to get his lawn chair)...

Willow,
One thing you willl notice for sure is the step up to component video from composite and, to a lesser degree, S-Vid connections. Even on a standard TV...