you should try onkyo's cables. They are cheap, heavy gauge, and rumor has it a version of monster? thats what i've read i don't know if its true. www.shoponkyo.com

Wow! Awesome post. I always wondered if someone would test this thoroughly. Always have to be wary about the cables. But that is a good point about putting hdmi cables that can support future requirements.

By the way, can you do speaker wire next?

Do they sell wireless cables?

Great post. Now I'm waiting for one whiny type to say that this only happened because the test was at Monster.

The real world, in basement test will be the final judge, but it's nice to see someone independent running these tests. Thank you.

It looks like what was considered fail is that the data eye was degraded too far. Is there any proof that in the fail case the data actually was dropped or where you just looking at the eye?

I will never, ever buy any Monster Cables.

1440p? You have to be kidding.

When I read "real-world" testing I expected you to be running cables in-between high end devices and TV's and then simulating for the future standards.

This isn't real world testing because none of us watch our content in a DSA. (Or at least I hope not)
When you failed something it may have looked exactly the same as on of the cables you passed.

Wow, I'm impressed with the Giz's followup from part I. These are some interesting results that seem to confirm what most of the commenters stated in the previous post. I found it odd that the spectrum is curved and appears more bowed-out on the monoprice cables compared to the monster cable's of approx. equal size.

Looking forward to the next part as it will apply to most of the readers who will only be concerned with their respective "real-world" results.

Kudos.

@mmarks

Yeah, really good point VISUALLY just because there is a little noise doesnn't mean any errors in the digital transmission would be transferred to the screen.

A nice test would have been some kind of calibration screen test on a real set using both the cables.

Excellent information, and highly useful. Though in this quick-cut, you-tubian day and age, you may lose a few readers as there is no video, animation, or blinking lights to keep the younguns interested.

Maybe a pithy video with stop motion Optimus telling us the results?

Hmmm, How about next time the tests are done by an independent lab and NOT at Monter's HQ.

Nice guys

Most people need to regenerate signals for runs over 25ft so this is not suprising. I have done 1080p 50ft hdmi and dvi, but I was prepared to get regeneration caps.

Just buy the monoprice.

hmmm bookmarked again

:P

yeah - speaker wire would be nice too ;p!

"Not all cables are the same, however, and in truth, it's the medium-priced cables that may be the real rip-off."

If the cheap cable, the medium priced cable and the expensive cable all get the job done then wouldn't it be the expensive cable that's the real rip off?

To make a statement like "it's the medium priced cables that may be the real rip-off" screams bias. Clearly walking in to this thing someone at Giz already had a healthy dose of Monster's kool-aid and they just kept drinking.

I hope that check Giz got from Monster was a big one, because you've certainly earned it at this point. In doing so you've also lost my respect.

This is fantastic information! Excellent work, Giz!!

It would be nice to see what those muddy shots look like real-world -- hoked up to a BR/HDDVD drive and a 1080p TV. While I am certain that the Monoprice 50ft would have failed, I guess I am a little unclear what failure means in real world picture quality. I assume we are all geeky enough that even if we can not tell the difference, after seeing the failure on the Tektronix screen, we would not want to admit would could not tell the difference. :)

@Morr:

If you read TFA before passing judgement...They said that "it's the medium priced cables that may be the real rip-off" because the cheap cables out performed them in this "real-world" test. You would want a more $$ cable to perform better, no?

Great information Giz!

Now, please tell me which brand name I should purchase to make it through the next few years...

Sure it's great that your $120 monster cable is "future proof" and supports 1440p, but the fact of the matter is, by the time 1440p is a reality, (both in displays that support it and devices that output it) we won't even be using hdmi, we'll probably be using DisplayPort or whatever other new standard comes out to rob us of our hard earned greenbacks.

Not only that, but if you require a cable capable of 1440p to carry your precious 1080p, then who's to say you won't require a cable capable of 2080p to carry your 1440p signal.

The review was informative, but i still won't be buying any monster cables.

Fan-efing-tastic work there!!!

While these results are interesting I want to know if they took error correction into account.

Fuzzy signal at the end or not error correction can do amazing things in cleaning that up. It's why you see virtually no difference in strong OTA HDTV signal and one that is so-so.

@ Morr

I think the point was that it wouldn't get the job done.

In near-future world (1080p) as opposed to super-future world (1440p) the XtremeHD can't even get the job done at 6 ft but the $5.00 Monoprice can.

At super-future world (1440p) only the Monster 6 ft/2m succeeds.

At now world (1080i) and 10 m, only the Monster succeeds.

So while for many uses Monoprice is fine, there may be reasons to get a high end cord.

However, there never appears to be a reason to the XtremeHD.

Lets see some comps to BlueJean cables... A high quality resonably priced cable...

When the future world becomes the real world Monoprice will pass whatever's current and they'll still be 4% of the Monster Cable price.

When the markup is 2400% it's not thinking ahead or futureproofing, it's stupidity.

Now, can you do more test on 15ft?

And component cables?

By the time we need a cable capable of 1440p the companies that make the cheapo cables will probably be able to make cables capable of carrying that signal for the same price they make the cables that can't carry it now. That is if we are even still using HDMI at that point.

So, just get monoprice's category 2 cables, those are fine for real world 1080p right?

Great tests, but try uncoiling the cables - the results will change dramatically. I should know.

@92BuickLeSabre

There is a reason to get the XtremeHD cables, the simple fact that they are the cheapest cables that will work in the REAL WORLD available in retail. Last time I looked, Monoprice didnt sell cables in stores and if they did, they wouldnt be as cheap as they are now.

When you buy an HD setup, you want to get everything working as soon as you get home, you dont want to wait for your cables to be shipped (and what if they are on back order, like Monoprice cables often are). You need to keep that in perspective.

The need for an independent lab aside, it certainly appears that the Monster cables pass the "Data Eye" signal more precisely... but the question is what (if any) digital data is lost by the cables that barely fail? I to call for a visual real-world, independent lab test.

Please send me a 1440p TV and Media player with all the cables and I'll be happy to tell you which cables work best - if I get to keep the 1440p TV.

Cheers.

Kudos Gizmodo testers! Thanks for a real test with real data. I would have preferred a list of cables with results but the photos were a nice touch.

Now I can sleep at night.

It's my understanding that you aren't supposed to run HDMI over 15 ft without a repeater (or is that meters?). Given the failure of everything but Monster at that length on your 1080p tests.

I wonder if an amp might help. You could buy both a Monoprice cable and amp for the cost of the Monster Cable.

Cheers,
Randy

@nathanryan:

That was my thought, as well - leaving the cables coiled leads to more potential crosstalk, especially in the longer cables (Monoprice 50', anyone?).

For the current-generation HD (1.65 Gbps), a great alternative for long runs are extenders and repeaters. Gefen makes a great extender for runs up to 330 feet. It basically converts HDMI to ethernet for the long cable run and them back to HDMI at the other end. It is a little pricey, though - $600 for the longest-range extender they have.

Part three will be the real test. If the analyzer indicates failure on cables that still pipe a usable signal that will be a big SLAP in the face of Monster. I can't wait.

@O2J: You're right. In future world El-Cheap-O cables will just sell a cable that'll do the job at 1/10th the price of Monster.

Lemme do the math...

Buy a cheap cable for a fraction of the price that gets the job done now. Upgrade to another cheap cable later, when necessary. With a combined cost that's still a fraction of the amount of a single monster cable.
Hmmm... Carry the one... Divide by two...

That equals... F--- off Monster.

I work hard for my dollars, and I can think of better ways to piss 'em away.

I don't see the point of purchasing a cable for future-world needs. Sure, if it was a difference between $100 and $200 ... then it's a significant investment and I want to make sure my investment lasts.

But, we're talking a difference of $5 and $200. In that case, if the cheapest cable that meets my real-world needs is $5-$20, then I'll get that. When my real-world needs begin to approach the future-world, it's likely that the *then* real-world $5-$20 cables will match those needs and I'll just toss the old cable.

@cduran02

Fair enough.

Okay, I just put together a new system using Monoprice HDMI cables and thought I would share my experience. My setup is probably most representative of the average everyday Joe who goes into Best Buy for decent equipment. The only equipment I used to test is my own eyes. Here are my components.

Harman Kardon AVR-247
Samsung 42" DLP TV capable of 720P
Samsung upconvert DVD-R/VCR combo
Cablevision's Scientific Atlanta Explorer 8300HD DVR
XBox 360
Playstation 2
Nintendo Wii

I purchased two 3' HDMI cables and one 10' HDMI cable from Monoprice. All the analog audio and video cables I use are Acoustic Research unless otherwise noted. Not many of those were needed with this new setup though because all output gets sent to my TV through the HDMI cable.

Explorer 8300HD DVR
Lets start with cable box. I connected a 3' HDMI cable from the cable box to my AVR. The 10' HDMI cable goes from the AVR to the TV. The HD signals varied. The HD movies (HBO, Starz, etc) looked great, but sports lacked warmth. The colors seemed washed out. After adjusting my TV's color settings I found I was not happy with the way sports looked. Any programs that were shot in standard def running on HD channels (That 70's Show, Scrubs) looked HORRIBLE. The HDMI picked up so much detail that it showed all the crap that you wouldn't normally see.The standard def channels seemed fuzzy, but they looked that way via component too. I am convinced that this was due to Cablevision and not the cables as the rest of my review can attest to. I disconnected the HDMI and went directly into the TV via the component cables that came with the cable box, and just ran a coax audio cable to the AVR for surround.

Samsung upconvert DVD-R/VCR
This is connected to my AVR via the other 3' HDMI cable. The VCR, of course, looks like crap. I won't even go there. The DVD, however, is amazing. The picture is unbelievably clear. Looks much better than using a progressive scan DVD through component cables. I was very happy. Over the weekend I watched Fellowship of the Ring and then the special edition of Star Wars. Yeah, my wife was REAL happy about that. I forsee sitting through a couple really bad chick flicks for that one in my immediate future. Anyway, the visuals from both movies were astonishing. I was happy with the audio separation too. Each channel was crystal clear.

Xbox 360
This is where the unit really shines. The 360 is designed for HD and it shows. It is hooked up to the AVR via the component cables that came with the system and a toslink cable. It is passed through the HDMI cable to the TV. The audio is not passed through the HDMI cable. Not a problem because I usually prefer the surround sound. First I put in Call of Duty 3, then I tried Fight Night Round 3 and finally Gears of War. Oh my God. I actually played through Gears again because it looked so good...well okay, also because the game is awesome.

Playstation 2.
This is hooked up to my AVR via Monster PS2 component cables. (They were cheaper than the regular component cables when I went to buy them) I was worried because this actually had to be upconverted through the AVR to 720P. Turns out I had no need to worry. I put in God of War and was blown away. This has to be in part attributed to my AVR, but the game looked great. I then tried Final Fantasy XII. I really wish I had this upconvert AVR before I played the game on my 720P TV going direct from the PS2. Very surprised on the quality.

Nintendo Wii
This is another system where it would be upconverted from 480P to 720P. Being the PS2 passed I wasn't too worried. This is hooked up via the component cables that came with the Wii. I put in the only game that graphically mattered, Zelda. It looked better than the PS2, but nowhere close to the 360. The only problem I had was with the 8 bit NES games I downloaded from the Wii Shop. The v-sync was off and the game could not be played. Not sure if the Wii's emulation had a problem with the upconvert on the AVR or the HDMI cable. The system is now hooked directly into my TV like my cable box.

As stated in the Monster Cable review, for short runs the Monoprice cable will meet all of your needs.

Nice test, useless for purchasing decisions, but nice. I run 30ft HDMI 1.1 to my Panny AE700 with no degradation. Of course it's 720P. A Monster brand cable would have cost me an additional $200 at the time (now two years ago).

So, by the time I upgrade to 1080P I'll have reconfigured my room with a 60" LCD instead of a projector - meaning new cables. By the time we're receiving terrestrial broadcast at 1440P, have the ability to display 1440P, or have streaming services at 1440P I'll be blind, senile, and crapping into a bag...

Now this is the type of quantifiable testing we should see more of around the Internets... An electronics version of Myth Busters.

What's next??

Good read, Gizmodo!

I applaud your showing the test and your willingness to go through it all to bring us the results.

This is the kind of killer stuff that got me reading Gizmodo in the first place.

-among other things.

While this is something I have little use for, I find it incredibly fascinating. I'm like a fat kid watching the slurpee machine turn.

holy shit! A useful thing on Gizmodo!

Speaker cable next....WTF....

Its Analog and the worst part of your sound system is the SPEAKER!!! its horribly inefficient compared to the rest of the line. Should your problem be the cable has too much noise/distortion....THEN YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM AT ALL!!!!

"When you buy an HD setup, you want to get everything working as soon as you get home, you dont want to wait for your cables to be shipped (and what if they are on back order, like Monoprice cables often are). You need to keep that in perspective."

When I buy an HD setup I tend to more thought into it than say a candy bar.

Who spends hundreds or thousands of dollars on impulse?

Order the stuff on Monday, ship it 2-day, get it Wednesday and buy the TV Friday.

Personally, I've never had a problem with Monoprice items being on backorder.

Speaker wire is speaker wire, only difference I've ever found is the price per ft. and the color of the insulation.

Haven't seen anyone yet address a most important point: it's one thing to swap out a 6 foot cable. It's another to rip out 50 feet of cable when it's in-wall and replace it with new cable. If you can do it yourself, fine. If a pro is doing it, the cable cost is the LEAST of your worries. If you're planning on staying in a home, that cable may be there 10 years or more. Still doesn't make Monster a good value; IMO better cables are out there at far less money.

if it's this easy to test they why don't they just require manufactures to state a rating on the packaging of their cable...

funny a $4 cable does the same job as a $120 cable... then there is no reason for $120 cable to exist in my eyes... why would Monster ever overbuild a cable to that extent? lets say they are spending double what the $4 cable costs in materials... say they are paying $4.. wonder what percentage of the remaining $116 of each cable goes to marketing and what percentage is profit? sure the the more expensive cable is 'better', but unnecessarily so, so it is a rip off.. the biggest rip-off at least at the short distances, because being better gains you nothing.

Attention iwanttodiggthis digg user. Email me please. I want to give you headline and lead writing lessons before you digg any more of our stories. You buried the lead. Hard.

I have all the same (actually better) equipment at my disposal. If anyone is interested in getting a type of cable tested I'd be glad to repeat this experiment, just mail me the cable.

Email me if you're interested: bunedoggle @ gmail.com

I have 10 years of analog signal integrity experience and tested fibre channel cables for a few years.