This might be a controversial topic but I've gotta know. Why on earth is ISF partnering with the largest snake oil cable seller - Monster Cable.

ISF has partnered with Monster to create a Calibration DVD. ISF has also "certified" Monster cable in fact the president of ISF is on one of Monster Cables pages.

Doesn't this tarnish ISF's image as well as the notion of ISF "certified" calibration in general?

Why on earth is ISF partnering with the largest snake oil cable seller - Monster Cable.


$$$$?

Mon$ter is not snake oil. Just overpriced and slick marketing savvy.

Awareness. The same reason the ISF partnered with Best Buy.
Consumer awareness has been the single biggest hurdle in the calibration business. Joel is trying to spread the word.

Now it's up to the consumer to distinguish the difference between the industry's top professionals and the rest...

Monster's already had a calibration DVD out. They're just reupping, I'd assume.

Awareness. The same reason the ISF partnered with Best Buy.
Consumer awareness has been the single biggest hurdle in the calibration business. Joel is trying to spread the word.

To an extent I agree with you that it is about awareness, but I also think on this forum that there is some confusion about what the ISF is/is not. I think that most people think of the ISF as a standards-setting body, rather than an advocacy/education/marketing organization; evangelizing, even. I think the real parallel is to the early days of THX's involvement in home audio (educating consumers and the industry, validating performance, and all-around making audio a better experience both in the theater and in the home). People may have certain opinions about what the THX logo and certification represents today, but people would be doing THX and LucasFilm a grave disservice thinking that overall they have not radically improved both theatrical and home audio presentation. I think that Joel and the ISF have done similar good works, though with lots left to be done, on the video front for home presentation.

Bill

To an extent I agree with you that it is about awareness, but I also think on this forum that there is some confusion about what the ISF is/is not. I think that most people think of the ISF as a standards-setting body, rather than an advocacy/education/marketing organization; evangelizing, even. I think the real parallel is to the early days of THX's involvement in home audio (educating consumers and the industry, validating performance, and all-around making audio a better experience both in the theater and in the home). People may have certain opinions about what the THX logo and certification represents today, but people would be doing THX and LucasFilm a grave disservice thinking that overall they have not radically improved both theatrical and home audio presentation. I think that Joel and the ISF have done similar good works, though with lots left to be done, on the video front for home presentation.

Bill


Well said...

This might be a controversial topic but I've gotta know. Why on earth is ISF partnering with the largest snake oil cable seller - Monster Cable.

ISF has partnered with Monster to create a Calibration DVD. ISF has also "certified" Monster cable in fact the president of ISF is on one of Monster Cables pages.

Doesn't this tarnish ISF's image as well as the notion of ISF "certified" calibration in general?

THX has also done deals with Monster Cable.

http://www.thx.com/products/home/cables.html

Though much of it is as described, there are independent reviews by respected sources that have shown there are things that the high end Monster Cable HDMI for example can pass that other cheaper HDMI cable has failed the tests on.

Both THX, Ltd. and the ISF have offered quality assurance consulting programs, services, and certifications to multiple manufacturers, in and outside of the home entertainment industry for over a decade. Both organizations have elevated the quality of images and sound which consumers and professionals experience today. Monster Cable should be applauded for seeking advice and guidance from outside agents to assist them with their product design, testing and quality control.

Do the prices of said products increase as a result? Of course. Hiring THX and the ISF increases the operating costs of the client manufacturer. Do such manufacturers want consumers to know that they have enlisted the participation of these industry leaders in the development and quality assurance of these products? Of course. Is there a potential market advantage for these products to have a 'THX' or 'ISF' certification logo on them? In many cases, yes.

Are such products perfect? Of course not. Therefore, is there potentially some aspect of such products that could be criticized? Of course. This forum is replete with cynics, malcontents, naysayers, critics and pedants who feel elevated when they can dig up and point out such limitations or defects in product design or performance. Seldom do such critics devote themselves to producing a superior solution. There's a fundamental defect in human nature that assumes greatness in a capacity to criticize others' achievements.

Monster Cable Corporation is a 'big dog' in the consumer electronics industry. They got to that position by doing a helluva lot more things right than wrong. Monster has also helped and elevated a lot more people than it has disappointed. Be assured that neither the ISF nor THX, Ltd. consider themselves "tarnished" by their association with Noel Lee and his endeavors. THX and the ISF also have their share of critics in this forum and the industry at large. Constructive criticism is beneficial. Labels such as "tarnished" and suspicions of dishonesty or corruption are more often presumptuous and/or juvenile than not.

Do similar products exist with equal or superior performance? It's entirely possible. Excellence is not the sole purview of Monster/THX/ISF. Is it easier for many consumers to recognize when extra effort has been devoted to assuring the quality of performance, if the product has a recognizable certification logo on it? That's part of the objective.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

Both THX, Ltd. and the ISF have offered quality assurance consulting programs, services, and certifications to multiple manufacturers, in and outside of the home entertainment industry for over a decade. Both organizations have elevated the quality of images and sound which consumers and professionals experience today. Monster Cable should be applauded for seeking advice and guidance from outside agents to assist them with their product design, testing and quality control.

Do the prices of said products increase as a result? Of course. Hiring THX and the ISF increases the operating costs of the client manufacturer. Do such manufacturers want consumers to know that they have enlisted the participation of these industry leaders in the development and quality assurance of these products? Of course. Is there a potential market advantage for these products to have a 'THX' or 'ISF' certification logo on them? In many cases, yes.

Are such products perfect? Of course not. Therefore, is there potentially some aspect of such products that could be criticized? Of course. This forum is replete with cynics, malcontents, naysayers, critics and pedants who feel elevated when they can dig up and point out such limitations or defects in product design or performance. Seldom do such critics devote themselves to producing a superior solution. There's a fundamental defect in human nature that assumes greatness in a capacity to criticize others' achievements.

Monster Cable Corporation is a 'big dog' in the consumer electronics industry. They got to that position by doing a helluva lot more things right than wrong. Monster has also helped and elevated a lot more people than it has disappointed. Be assured that neither the ISF nor THX, Ltd. consider themselves "tarnished" by their association with Noel Lee and his endeavors. THX and the ISF also have their share of critics in this forum and the industry at large. Constructive criticism is beneficial. Labels such as "tarnished" and suspicions of dishonesty or corruption are more often presumptuous and/or juvenile than not.

Do similar products exist with equal or superior performance? It's entirely possible. Excellence is not the sole purview of Monster/THX/ISF. Is it easier for many consumers to recognize when extra effort has been devoted to assuring the quality of performance, if the product has a recognizable certification logo on it? That's part of the objective.

Best regards and beautiful pictures,
G. Alan Brown, President
CinemaQuest, Inc.
A Lion AV Consultants Affiliate

"Advancing the art and science of electronic imaging"

I find Monster Cable prices rather juvenile. Reading Kurt Denke's articles on Blue Jeans Cable about Monster cable "testing" and "certification" have really brought to light what this company is about. There is nothing inherently superior about this product that makes there outrageous prices better then their inexpensive competitors.

From what I gather from other posts this is mainly about getting into mainstream supply chain and making some good cash with some marketing.

I believe it was last year or 2007 when Disney and Monster put out a DVD called "The Higher Definition Home Theater Experience" which was attached to an issue of Widescreen Review (I think). Noel Lee and ISF head Joel Silver was among those on the disc, including people from HDMI, THX, Simplay and the CEA. While the point of the disc was to extol the virtues of Blu-ray and HD, the interviews with those personalities were thinly veiled sales pitches for consumers to buy Monster Cable. It is this type of action that makes Monster seem unsavory and dishonest, in addition to their legal shenanigans with regard to the word monster. I think this furthers the OP's assertion that the ISF's reputation could be tarnished being associated with Monster. Of course each entity should be taken for its individual virtues.

I believe it was last year or 2007 when Disney and Monster put out a DVD called "The Higher Definition Home Theater Experience" which was attached to an issue of Widescreen Review (I think). Noel Lee and ISF head Joel Silver was among those on the disc, including people from HDMI, THX, Simplay and the CEA. While the point of the disc was to extol the virtues of Blu-ray and HD, the interviews with those personalities were thinly veiled sales pitches for consumers to buy Monster Cable.
You do realize that the whole thing was a not-really-veiled-at-all pitch to get you to buy stuff, right?

It is this type of action that makes Monster seem unsavory and dishonest, in addition to their legal shenanigans with regard to the word monster.
What is dishonest about putting out marketing collateral that tries to sell your product? Have you checked how thin WSR is getting these days? Would you prefer that some of the larger companies that support that publication quit advertising so that they appeared more "honest"?

Sorry, but a simple trademark fight doesn't make a company evil. Their prices are exorbitant, but that merely makes them amusing to avoid and gives you clout with your friends when you put them onto folks like Monoprice and Blue Jeans.

I think this furthers the OP's assertion that the ISF's reputation could be tarnished being associated with Monster. Of course each entity should be taken for its individual virtues.

People who go out of their way looking for reasons to hate Monster will definitely think more poorly of all things ISF because it has been associated with something they intensely dislike. Whether the underlying hatred is rational or not is a different discussion, I guess.

Fair disclosure: when I first got into home theater in the 90s, I bought Monster cables because they were the best value brand of the ones I had available at the shops I frequented. Now, I have been known to buy their products for my home theater or for friends' theaters whenever we are redoing cabling and find that we are missing something. I don't particularly like paying a 200% - 300% premium over what I could pay online, but I don't like not finishing a job more. If you think for a moment about differences in business model, a Blue Jeans cable would be even more expensive than a Monster cable if they had to sell through retail channels (inventory costs, marketing costs, retail mark-up). That wouldn't make Blue Jeans evil, merely less of a good deal than they are today.

Bill

I don't know how any rational person with any idea about how HDMI works can justify Monster's use of "speed ratings" in selling HDMI cable.

It is patently obvious that speed ratings are merely a deceptive advertising device designed to trick people into buying more expensive cable.

If someone can come up with a non-deceptive explanation for Monster's speed ratings, I would love to hear it. Also, someone please explain the proper application of Monster's $99 MSRP 1 meter "Ultra High Speed" cable and what advantages it holds over its $50 MSRP 1 meter "Standard" speed cable.

Speed ratings are nothing more than a device used to convince the ill informed that it is better to have faster speed than a slower speed. Faster is better, right? If the customer doesn't beleive that, you can always direct them to the Monster sponsored display comparison in which one display has an HDMI connection and the other is fed by composite.

I do not think it helps ISF (an organization that has at its root, an informational message of spreading the benefits of calibration) to align itself with a company like Monster (an organization that uses false information in spreading the alleged benefits of its products). Anyone else see this contradiction? This kind of alliance only gives ammunition to those who accuse ISF of peddling snake oil.

If someone can come up with a non-deceptive explanation for Monster's speed ratings, I would love to hear it. Also, someone please explain the proper application of Monster's $99 MSRP 1 meter "Ultra High Speed" cable and what advantages it holds over its $50 MSRP 1 meter "Standard" speed cable.


Or how bout a 1.3a certified 4ft cable for $3.50
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024008&p_id=4956&seq=1&format=2

Or how bout a 1.3a certified 4ft cable for $3.50
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024008&p_id=4956&seq=1&format=2

How fast does that cable go? It must not be very fast because Monoprice won't tell you. :rolleyes:

From Monster:

Standard Speed: "Ideal for first generation HDTVs." 1m - $50 MSRP

High Speed: " For maximum performance from HDTVs." 1m = $70 MSRP

Advanced High Speed: "Specially designed for home theater enthusiasts who also want the best in HD gaming." 1m = $80 MSRP

Ultra High Speed: "ultimate picture and sound from larger HDTVs, advanced projectors, and high definition AV sources." 1m = $100 MSRP

I question whether any non-defective 1 meter cable would ever fail to work in ANY application.

Yeah I was in best buy when some salesmen started spouting something like that to a customer.

made me throw up in my mouth a little.

How fast does that cable go? It must not be very fast because Monoprice won't tell you. :rolleyes:.

They don't?:rolleyes:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024008&p_id=4956&seq=1&format=3#specification
High Speed HDMI 1.3a Category 2 Certified
Bandwidth: up to 340 Mhz (10.2 Gbps)


HDMI 1.3a Cat2 spec
http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#112
http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#49

You should be questioning why Mon$ter doesn't tell you the specs/differences between Standard, High, Advanced and Ultra. ;)

They don't?:rolleyes:

http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=102&cp_id=10240&cs_id=1024008&p_id=4956&seq=1&format=3#specification



HDMI 1.3a Cat2 spec
http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#112
http://www.hdmi.org/learningcenter/faq.aspx#49

You should be questioning why Mon$ter doesn't tell you the specs/differences between Standard, High, Advanced and Ultra. ;)

I hope you know I wasn't serious.

Sorry, but a simple trademark fight doesn't make a company evil.

How about their multiple trademark fights against businesses that don't dilute the trademark or cause confusion between them and companies using the word monster in their business names? Or how about a supposed patent infringement against Blue Jeans cable which wasn't pursued further?

People who go out of their way looking for reasons to hate Monster will definitely think more poorly of all things ISF because it has been associated with something they intensely dislike. Whether the underlying hatred is rational or not is a different discussion, I guess.

No one has to look for reasons to hate Monster. That company provides the reasons with their actions.

Fair disclosure: when I first got into home theater in the 90s, I bought Monster cables because they were the best value brand of the ones I had available at the shops I frequented. Now, I have been known to buy their products for my home theater or for friends' theaters whenever we are redoing cabling and find that we are missing something. I don't particularly like paying a 200% - 300% premium over what I could pay online, but I don't like not finishing a job more. If you think for a moment about differences in business model, a Blue Jeans cable would be even more expensive than a Monster cable if they had to sell through retail channels (inventory costs, marketing costs, retail mark-up). That wouldn't make Blue Jeans evil, merely less of a good deal than they are today.


I have Monster Cables in my systems as well, which I bought long before I became aware of their strong arm tactics.

I hope you know I wasn't serious.
Couldn't tell really. The last sentence of your post was probably all that was needed. ;)

Couldn't tell really. The last sentence of your post was probably all that was needed. ;)


My point is that the whole "Speed Rating" thing tells the consumer nothing and is incredibly deceptive. I would guess that is was designed to be intentionally deceptive, as were the descriptions that I quoted above, for the purpose of steering consumers in to the higher cost higher "speed" cables out of fear that the "slower" cables somehow either will not work or will given them a bad picture.

I do not think that Monster cables are low quality. They are not. Their marketing is just intentionally deceptive. Because of this, it was a bad move for a group like ISF to implicitly align itself with Monster. ISF comes off looking like it is also a dealer in deceptive information.

ISF comes off looking like it is also a dealer in deceptive information.

I think that philosophy is pretty much constrained to people that get brainwashed in forums like this. People that actually use the product and/or don't have a vested interest in supporting a Forum Sponsor probably could care less.

I think most reasonably aware individuals understand that ISF is simply using Monster as a business conduit to ensure brand recognition. Frankly, evangelizing proper video calibration is a great thing, and if in ISF's view partnering with the best-known accessory provider in the business is the path to this, more power to them. Fact is, ISF logos have been on Monster products for quite a few years now.

I would think any real enthusiast or industry member would be intelligent enough to take the long view, and understand that the end goal is laudable enough to maybe endure some raised eyebrows from a few skeptics that really don't understand the situation anyhow.

I think that philosophy is pretty much constrained to people that get brainwashed in forums like this. People that actually use the product and/or don't have a vested interest in supporting a Forum Sponsor probably could care less.

I think most reasonably aware individuals understand that ISF is simply using Monster as a business conduit to ensure brand recognition. Frankly, evangelizing proper video calibration is a great thing, and if in ISF's view partnering with the best-known accessory provider in the business is the path to this, more power to them. Fact is, ISF logos have been on Monster products for quite a few years now.

I would think any real enthusiast or industry member would be intelligent enough to take the long view, and understand that the end goal is laudable enough to maybe endure some raised eyebrows from a few skeptics that really don't understand the situation anyhow.
This is one of the few posts (truly) from you that i actually agree with.

This is one of the few posts (truly) from you that i actually agree with.

win some lose some

I do not think it helps ISF (an organization that has at its root, an informational message of spreading the benefits of calibration) to align itself with a company like Monster (an organization that uses false information in spreading the alleged benefits of its products). Anyone else see this contradiction? This kind of alliance only gives ammunition to those who accuse ISF of peddling snake oil.

I have no love for Monster, and in fact, despise many of the things that they have done. There is nothing wrong with using them to the greater good, however, which is what ISF has done in this case. Anyone who shuns ISF as selling snake oil is so far off the chart that they really do not matter anyway. Joel got his slick production that he could not have afforded nor distributed to the degree it was on his own. It actually turned out to be pretty good for what it is intended to be.

As for Monster, you can sometimes find good values in their products but it is typically when they are discounted. At best, they are typically overpriced, but generally decent build quality. Corporately, it is my opinion that they are of the biggest of the industry's whores.

Partnership and licencing/use of logos is a "business" venture that is a symbiotic relationship. Good in many cases, sometimes bad (based on one's opinion).

Logos are generally/only good to quickly sell to those that "look and buy" without reading or regard to price vs. performance and/or an understanding of the technology.

Just my opinion... I have my shields up to maximum now Captain. :)

I agree, ratman. In this case, it was really not about logos. ISF needed a vehicle to get the product out there. Monster, for all of its issues, had the resources, as did Microsoft, who ISF also partnered with to distribute it in Windows Media Center. Even though it probably got distributed to many more users in MC, it probably had more impact in the Monster deal for the people interested in getting the most from their displays.

Yeah, Monster is overpriced, but I found out by accident that Monster component cables ended up being better than the previous Acoustic Research component cables I had. But I buy most of my cables are from great deals thru e bay.

That said, I have a couple of different calibration dvds and I found the Monster one does a pretty good job with Brightness and Contrast settings. I struggle with Contrast on the other dvd's. This one does a better job for me in that area. But I can't say their Color, Tint or Sharpness is really all that helpful.