Page 1 of 1

Pricey Monster cable vs. coat hanger

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 1:55 pm
by KU40

Blind test was done on a few friends and they couldn't distinguish a difference between music played using monster wire and a coat hanger stretched out for connection between amp and speakers. ha.

Plus, I hate Monster anyways.

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:03 pm
by flakko
haha niiice

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:50 pm
by X-OvrDistortion
Sweet, guess I need to steal some coat hangers from work!!

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:12 pm
by Nigel
excellent, I've been saying for years that most of the "hype" about this feature or that feature is pure bull****, and that's why in my truck I'm running $25.00 cables, good enough for me.


Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:21 pm
by todd.brust
At one point i though RCA cables made a big difference, so i bought a 50 or 60 dollar set of 4 channel RCAs. Then i found out it was really a waste of money to pay big bucks for interconnects so i got a set of 5 dollar RCAs for my sub.

Cool article though. I should show this to the guys at the local shop who rep. monster like it is going out of style.

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 8:18 pm
by fbi90909
i use a monster RCA to 3.5mm cable for my ipod. i really like it cause it's a tough wire that takes alot of abuse as the ipod is constantly in use and is moved around all over the place. my friend on the other has gone through 2 really flimsy 5 dollar RCA to 3.5 for his Archos(portable media player) and is on his third.
i would say in some applications it would be good to spend that extra cash.
though i do agree with the blind test. if set up proplery RCA's really have no difference. all the RCA's going to my amps are all $10-15 no name brand RCA's i got from a local audio shop.
though at one point i did buy an Audiobahn 4channel RCA cause i thought it was cool and instead of 2 runs of rca's only 1 would be needed. lawl, those RCA's actualy sucked as the "Head" of them was flimsy and brke off.

blah blah blah

Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:32 pm
by nismo
I'm making my own, using Belden 8412 (purchased through work), and the ends I bought from Josh. I know I won't be able to hear a difference between those and the cheapies, but I hate the look of the cheapies, and I know I'm less likely to have issues with induced noise, so that's what I'm using.


Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:14 am
by 93CougarXR7SE
I paid less for the Monster cables than I would for coat hangers (I need to buy more hangers as it is) so that's why I use them. The gold is just hype, because everything else is just copper and tin solder. Audioquest uses silver in some of their wires, but who really gives a crap? Only reason I got some Audioquest is because they gave us $250 credit toward wires for every employee. I get 75% off cost, so I could go with them above buying junky ones when I need some. AQ looks better than Monster anyway.

I have noticed that the difference in speaker wire is apparent There is some gain, but the wire is expensive. We were able to notice a little difference between the AQ and Monster wire on a small shelf system, so I think you could notice more on a larger system, but only on a side-by-side comparison.

Just look at your weakest link. Is it worth it to get good cables if everything else is crap? You could run $500 HDMI cables, but if your TV is cheap, it's not worth it. Even with a Pioneer Elite, you won't have silver wires running throughout the TV.