Whether or not you really see a big difference in picture quality will depend on your setup. For example, my TV is a JVC rear projection that upconverts all video to 1080i so that the use of component connections at 480p is not a very big difference in picture quality. And of course your dvd player should have progressive scanning if you want to capitalize on the benefits of component connections to begin with. Also, having the same manufacturer for your TV and DVD player tends to yield better results in general.

The point being that all of these others factors and more will determine the quality of your video much more so than any 'special' cables. The cables do no work, they are just a medium that signals must pass through. Hence, the better cables are the ones that preserve the 75 ohm signal without distortion. But this is precisely the problem with ALL component cables that use RCA interconnects. The physics of the RCA connection do not allow for the ideal 75 ohms to pass through unmolested by interference, regardless of how great the cable is or how much it costs. In fact, the implementation of RCA interconnects was never intended for video use. It began as an audio solution and manufacturers gradually implemented it instead of the BNC interconnect because of cheaper costs and user familiarity.

In the end, I don't think these more expensive cables make a noticable difference in performance. For that matter, I don't see why people prefer to use toslink (optical) over digital coaxial. The toslink is much more unstable and sensitive to movement even though it's not susceptible to electrical interference since it uses light (but using light also requires the hardware to do more work in translating the signal). Point being that the audio quality is identical, but the toslink just costs more. Here again, the cable is not 'special', it only acts as a medium for signals to pass through, your actual equipment does all the work. So the ultimate question: Is it justifiable to spend so much more money on these high-end cables? Sure it is, in the same way some people choose to buy a Rolex over a Timex.


Buy the Cheap ones!   January 26, 2004
 27 out of 33 found this review helpful

Using the component input on your TV can make a huge difference in picture quality, but the differentce between the lower priced monster cables and the most expensive monster cables in not noticeable. Save yourself $50 and buy the cheap ones.


As with anything, only buy if you NEED them!   October 4, 2004
 17 out of 23 found this review helpful

These are cables are great if you have a system that might actually take advantage of them. I have a 50' Sony LCD Projection and the Sony Dav-FR8 Dream System, if I did not own a television that had a native 720p format or equivalant and a decent progressive scan DVD, why would I buy a 50$ cable to connect them.
When you get into mid to higher end components, your system becomes only as good as its weakest element, for me probaly my dvd player in my HTIB. In my case, I did notice a difference once I upgraded, I now know that I am recieving the best possiable picture from my DVD, but I am a into this sort of thing, for most it may all look the same.
In short these are not nessecary for 90% of home theaters, but if you spent $3000+ on your tv, I would say why not spring for them, otherwise you are not taking full advantage of your investment. But if you have a smaller flat screen CRT or the like, you will not be missing anything other than $30 if you choose to buy these cables.


No noticeble differnece.........yet.   December 17, 2000
 16 out of 24 found this review helpful

I have not seen much difference in terms of video quality, however, I have seen a dramatic decrease in terms of interference by my other e-devices around my little HT.