Hey gang. I've had my 360 Elite for roughly 2 weeks now. It's connected to my 5884 plasma (new also) via the included Xbox HDMI cable. The last 3 days, I will occasionally, with no recognizable pattern, get faint sparkles while playing (no specific game). These sparkles, I'm assuming, are the ones I've read about when people describle using lower quality HDMI connections, or longer runs with HDMI cables.

I've checked my other HDMI inputs (e.g. STB) during the sparkle periods, but it is completely absent. Typically, the sparkles will just go away, and have never persisted more than 5 minutes. I plan on playing a while after connecting my Blue Jeans HDMI cable to see if it still occurs. If not, I'll be purchasing another HDMI cable.

Curious is anyone had a similar experience, or any thoughts on the matter? Thanks!

I get really nasty looking "static-like" stuff when watching DVDs over HDMI on my new Elite and I never saw that on my premium over VGA. Don't know if that's something similar. I haven't noticed it yet playing mass effect. I'm considering returning my Elite.

Sparkles are generaly a cable issue.

Sparkles are generaly a cable issue.

Is the included HDMI cable known for having this issue?

i tested both the ms cable and a monoprice cable, they both had this issue.

i tested both the ms cable and a monoprice cable, they both had this issue.

Pay heed all you $4 HDMI cable supporters.:rolleyes:

Pay heed all you $4 HDMI cable supporters.:rolleyes:

Could be a display issue as well...

if 2 different cables are doing this, it's NOT the cable.

I had that issue with my samsung 4095 but the problem only occurred at 1080p not 1080i or 720p. So after some searching and posting on the official samsung 4095 thread I discovered that in the service menu you can adjust the HDMI delay from I think 75 to 70 and that corrected my problem. I am not sure if this will work for you but it did the trick with me. You may want to try adjusting the resolution to 1080i or 720p to see if the problem still occurs

if 2 different cables are doing this, it's NOT the cable.

If two dirtbag cables are, the possibility remains.

Not to be the bearer of bad news but there have been multiple comments / threads about this "sparkling" on the Samsung plasmas. I have a friend that has one and it has the issue. It took me by surprise because the set looks really good except for those red/green/blue pixels flying everywhere. I cannot remember the model number though and will have to check that out. Do a forum search on "samsung sparkling" in the plasma display forum and you will get more info.

Not to be the bearer of bad news but there have been multiple comments / threads about this "sparkling" on the Samsung plasmas. I have a friend that has one and it has the issue. It took me by surprise because the set looks really good except for those red/green/blue pixels flying everywhere. I cannot remember the model number though and will have to check that out. Do a forum search on "samsung sparkling" in the plasma display forum and you will get more info.

Who cares. Threads about hardware problems on the same forum that endorses cheap HDMI solutions is questionable. I suspect that has most everything to do with it, especially when it's known that sparkling is an issue with poor digital video transmission over HDMI/DVI.

You might want to use cables with ferrite beads.

I highly doubt it's the cable. I have used several Monoprice cables as well as the MS Xbox cable and have no issues.

no real comment , my "ELITE" died the first 12 hours......

UPDATE:

Okay, after experimenting some more with different configurations, I've found the origin of the problem (vaguely). When I set my HDTV output to "Just Scan" (this is the native/optimal output on my Samsung 5884 plasma), the lines are present. When I put it on 16:9, the lines disappear, but the image is enlarged/stretched slightly. When pressing Info on my HDTV remote (in any mode - Just Scan or 16:9), it reads Resolution: 1920x1080, Horizontal Frequency: 67kHz, Vertical Frequency: 60Hz. I'm naive with the frequency readings, but is there something to consider there (also, why is one kilohertz, the other only hertz)?

The strange thing is, these lines weren't present the first week of playing the Xbox, even on Just Scan mode. Any thoughts?

I highly doubt it's the cable. I have used several Monoprice cables as well as the MS Xbox cable and have no issues.

Lucky you ;)

Lucky you ;)

Work for Monster Cable?

Anyway... I've used 75' and 50' monoprice cables. As long as you have a good signal... no problem at all. Monoprice rocks. Don't buy snakeoil.

Work for Monster Cable?

Plenty of choices in between the extremes.

Anyway... I've used 75' and 50' monoprice cables. As long as you have a good signal... no problem at all. Monoprice rocks. Don't buy snakeoil.

Buy crap instead. Great alternative.:rolleyes:

But that isn't the point. Has the OP actually TRIED using a better cable, or are we going to assume the TV has a design flaw when the weakest link in the signal is plainly obvious?

Please inspect the sig carefully....

I love those people that think that monster cables are some uber quality pieces of wire. I get them for almost the same price as monoprice cables through a friend who is a manager at a local BB. If I have to buy a cable individually, I usually get a monster one from him because it's cheaper when you figure in shipping on a single cable. $100 monster 6' HDMI cable is like $6... the dozen or so monoprice HDMI cables I have across 4 setups work perfectly fine... you can't tell the difference.

There are thousands of people on this board that can attest to how well monoprice and blue jeans cables work... and quite honestly... I doubt that microsoft would ship their system with a cable that wasn't up to spec... they already have enough problems with the 360...

UPDATE:

Okay, after experimenting some more with different configurations, I've found the origin of the problem (vaguely). When I set my HDTV output to "Just Scan" (this is the native/optimal output on my Samsung 5884 plasma), the lines are present. When I put it on 16:9, the lines disappear, but the image is enlarged/stretched slightly. When pressing Info on my HDTV remote (in any mode - Just Scan or 16:9), it reads Resolution: 1920x1080, Horizontal Frequency: 67kHz, Vertical Frequency: 60Hz. I'm naive with the frequency readings, but is there something to consider there (also, why is one kilohertz, the other only hertz)?

The strange thing is, these lines weren't present the first week of playing the Xbox, even on Just Scan mode. Any thoughts?

You shouldn't use "Just" mode for 1080p. You should use 16:9 full mode on your TV. Now you also need to select 16:9 on your XBox to match it.

"Just" (or Just Scan as you called) is used for 4:3 signals to fill up the 16:9 screen. All HD signals 720p/1080i/1080p are native 16:9.

There shouldn't be any problems with just scan mode when using an xbox 360 / PS3 or a HD-DVD/BR player. Just scan (1:1 pixel mapping) is what you would want to use. 16:9 is more for HD-TV watching so the image is slightly over scanned. Do you have the option of trying your xbox at a friends house (or on another HD-TV in your house?). The line thing could be letting you know that you are going to have an RROD shortly... you never know...

Please inspect the sig carefully....

I love those people that think that monster cables are some uber quality pieces of wire. I get them for almost the same price as monoprice cables through a friend who is a manager at a local BB. If I have to buy a cable individually, I usually get a monster one from him because it's cheaper when you figure in shipping on a single cable. $100 monster 6' HDMI cable is like $6... the dozen or so monoprice HDMI cables I have across 4 setups work perfectly fine... you can't tell the difference.

There are thousands of people on this board that can attest to how well monoprice and blue jeans cables work... and quite honestly... I doubt that microsoft would ship their system with a cable that wasn't up to spec... they already have enough problems with the 360...

QFT

You shouldn't use "Just" mode for 1080p. You should use 16:9 full mode on your TV. Now you also need to select 16:9 on your XBox to match it.

"Just" (or Just Scan as you called) is used for 4:3 signals to fill up the 16:9 screen. All HD signals 720p/1080i/1080p are native 16:9.

"Just" means different things on different TVs. Sometimes it does a non-linear stretch (as you describe), but on some TV's it describes the 1:1 pixel mapping mode.

Monoprice and Bluejeans cables usually work very well. If you have an issue then let them know and they will take care of it. ;)

Contrast11,
Am I reading you right that you used two cables on one HDMI input and got sparkles, and then put the same cables on other HDMI inputs and no sparkles were present?

Generally in the broadcast industry, you get sparkles whenever your SDI signal is right on the edge. To eliminate cabling as a factor (which it usually is) you can get a waveform monitor and check out the eye pattern.

Please inspect the sig carefully....

...And you'll get part of the story...

I love those people that think that monster cables are some uber quality pieces of wire. I get them for almost the same price as monoprice cables through a friend who is a manager at a local BB. If I have to buy a cable individually, I usually get a monster one from him because it's cheaper when you figure in shipping on a single cable. $100 monster 6' HDMI cable is like $6...

Dealer cost isn't that low. So, I'm sure BB has found a source of internal shrinkage if they do a little digging.;)

the dozen or so monoprice HDMI cables I have across 4 setups work perfectly fine... you can't tell the difference.

...When they're working, which is my point.

There are thousands of people on this board that can attest to how well monoprice and blue jeans cables work... and quite honestly... I doubt that microsoft would ship their system with a cable that wasn't up to spec... they already have enough problems with the 360...

I'm surprised they still ship 360s that fail. Frankly, the supplier for their cables is probably the same one supplying Mono if not very close.

QFpartialT

Corrected.

...And you'll get part of the story...



Dealer cost isn't that low. So, I'm sure BB has found a source of internal shrinkage if they do a little digging.;)



...When they're working, which is my point.



I'm surprised they still ship 360s that fail. Frankly, the supplier for their cables is probably the same one supplying Mono if not very close.



Corrected.

What's your problem with Monoprice? Do you just like using overpriced cables to make yourself think you're getting a superior product so you can run around the forum and gloat about it?

All the Monoprice cables I've used have worked great, they've been very durable, and extremely well built. I've compared my Monoprice optical cable to an old Monster one I had laying around from the years before I found AVS, they sound exactly the same and work exactly the same 100% of the time. I've tested the same thing in comparing Monoprice's RG-59 component cables to a set of Monster cables: zero difference.

I'd dare say not only is Monoprice a better deal since it's a product that performs equally as well as a Monster cable at 1/10th the price, but also because they connect very easily. Every Monster cable I've owned has been an absolute pain in the ass to plug in and has been even more difficult to remove. I've actually had a Monster S-Video cable break an S-Video port on my TV because the damn connector was just a little too big, a problem I've heard recounted by many people who have used Monster HDMI cables.

I don't know why it's so hard to imagine he has a busted HDMI port, I've heard plenty of reports of people having wonky ports that don't work or work very poorly. Conversely I've heard very few people knock Monoprice cables and heard many many people have the same positive experience with them I have. The fact that he's used multiple cables and the problem persisted should just add to suspicion that it's a busted port.

O I also have another Monoprice order on the way for an HDMI cable, TOSLINK cable, VGA cable, and a CAT6 cable. I'll be sure to chime in as soon I've tested them to inform you of how flawlessly they're working.

"I'd dare say not only is Monoprice a better deal since it's a product that performs equally as well as a Monster cable at 1/10th the price, but also because they connect very easily. Every Monster cable I've owned has been an absolute pain in the ass to plug in and has been even more difficult to remove. I've actually had a Monster S-Video cable break an S-Video port on my TV because the damn connector was just a little too big, a problem I've heard recounted by many people who have used Monster HDMI cables."

Gotta agree about Monster cabling being ridiculously hard to attach to devices...it really is too cumbersome. I have stripped some plating because of those cables for sure.

I don't know why it's so hard to imagine he has a busted HDMI port, I've heard plenty of reports of people having wonky ports that don't work or work very poorly. Conversely I've heard very few people knock Monoprice cables and heard many many people have the same positive experience with them I have. The fact that he's used multiple cables and the problem persisted should just add to suspicion that it's a busted port.

I just want to make sure he explores all troubleshooting options. He appears to have swapped cables and since issues persist, that is self-explanatory.

You will excuse me however for not jumping on the "cheap cables can't possibly be at fault" bandwagon.

I just want to make sure he explores all troubleshooting options. He appears to have swapped cables and since issues persist, that is self-explanatory.

You will excuse me however for not jumping on the "cheap cables can't possibly be at fault" bandwagon.

You're not exploring all the troubleshooting options though. Despite the fact he's tried multiple cables you're still saying it's probably the "cheap" cables, which is unlikely considering the high satisfaction most people on this board express with Monoprice cables. No one said cheap cables can't possibly be at fault, it's just unlikely multiple cables he's used have been busted. On top of that you seem to have something against Monoprice cables because you don't want to accept they're just as high quality as more expensive cables and you seem pretty adamant about it not being anything but the cables.

By the way inexpensive doesn't necessarily translate to being a low-quality product, any smart consumer should know this

You're not exploring all the troubleshooting options though. Despite the fact he's tried multiple cables you're still saying it's probably the "cheap" cables, which is unlikely considering the high satisfaction most people on this board express with Monoprice cables.

Quote = Me: He appears to have swapped cables and since issues persist, that is self-explanatory.

Sylvan's phone number is in the book.;)

By the way inexpensive doesn't necessarily translate to being a low-quality product, any smart consumer should know this

Cheap isn't a virtue. Any smart consumer should know this.

Quote = Me: He appears to have swapped cables and since issues persist, that is self-explanatory.

Sylvan's phone number is in the book.;)



Cheap isn't a virtue. Any smart consumer should know this.

Nor is expensive a virtue. Quality products can be had for good prices, case and point: Monoprice. Again I'm not seeing the logic how his swapping cables would indicate it's the cables. It makes more sense that he has a faulty port than multiple broken cables.

You keep saying "it's self-explanatory" well apparently it's not because I'm not getting it. When my PS2 started showing wonky video artifacts I had to determine where they were coming from: The tv, the cable, or the PS2. How did I determine this? I plugged into two different TVs using two different cables. After the artifacts persisted regardless of cable used or TV viewed on I determined it was my PS2. Low and behold I sent it into Sony, the PS2 turned out to be defective, and they sent me a refurb.

I would think the same logic should apply here, if he's tried multiple cable on the same input and the issue persists it's probably not the cables. How about actually explaining your argument other than saying the "cables are crap" which from what I can tell is your only argument.

Both my PS3 and 360 had this issue when hooked up directly to my Sceptre 37" set to 1080P and HDMI or HDCP were selected. The problem vanished if I lied to my set and told it it was hooked up via DVI (used the same port and cable on my set). It has to do with the timing the set accepts over HDMI not the cable or the devices. The problem completely vanished when I put my Harmon Karmon receiver in the mix, it seems to put out an acceptable timing signal for my set, my PS3 and 360 at 1080P, oh yes all with the same cables that I've been using.

It makes more sense that he has a faulty port than multiple broken cables.

You keep saying "it's self-explanatory" well apparently it's not because I'm not getting it.

That is what I ended up saying. Multiple cables = self-explanatory that it's the port.

How about actually explaining your argument other than saying the "cables are crap" which from what I can tell is your only argument.

Price does this to people. It basically causes companies that make better products to justify why and how they aren't bottom-shelf and therefore equally as cheap. Sorta backwards, don't you think?

Both my PS3 and 360 had this issue when hooked up directly to my Sceptre 37" set to 1080P and HDMI or HDCP were selected. The problem vanished if I lied to my set and told it it was hooked up via DVI (used the same port and cable on my set). It has to do with the timing the set accepts over HDMI not the cable or the devices. The problem completely vanished when I put my Harmon Karmon receiver in the mix, it seems to put out an acceptable timing signal for my set, my PS3 and 360 at 1080P, oh yes all with the same cables that I've been using.

I have the same Sceptre TV with what may be the same issue as you, though I wouldn't characterize it as "sparklies", just a smattering of pixels towards the left side, that are just hard wrong, no flickering or anything, but pinkish multi-pixel blocks, especially visible on the 360 dashboard. Switching to DVI, everything is perfect. I wouldn't characterize using the DVI input selection, as "lying" to the set. It's just that when you select the virtual DVI input (same connector) on the TV, the TV reports slightly different info to the 360. It still runs 1080P whether HDMI or DVI, but I believe the DVI input is using the RGB colorspace vs the HDMI input using the YUV colorspace. In theory, the RGB colorspace would use more bandwidth. So, the fact that the bad pixel blocks go away, can't be due to the cable, since the DVI input would use more bandwidth due to the colorspace difference. In any case, one additonal benefit to using the DVI input, is that it maps 1:1 pixels, with no overscan like you get on the HDMI input. I have a Samsung blu-ray player that works perfectly in 1080P to the HDMI input on the Sceptre (YUV colorspace), but it will not work on the DVI input, since despite what the setup menu on the Samsung blu-ray player claims, it can't be set to "computer" (RGB colorspace). So, I'm stuck with overscan via Samsung blu-ray => Sceptre. No overscan with HD-DVD via 360 to the Sceptre on DVI though.

BTW if you check the the HDTV LCD display section, there is mention of a way to tweak the memory timing on the Sceptre to eliminate the issue. I haven't bothered since I like the 1:1 pixel mapping from DVI, though it does require 2 extra macro steps on the remote to get to DVI vs HDMI.

P.J.

There is not necessarily a correlation between price and quality. The true correlation lies between price and marketing.

HDMI is digital and you will never convince me that cable quality has any effect on a series of electronic bits.

Have fun plugging your $100 Monster cables into your overpriced Bose equipment.


Cheap isn't a virtue. Any smart consumer should know this.

I'm sure that most everybody must've seen this by now, but I suppose it's been forgotten?

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/field-notes/the-truth-about-monster-cable-266616.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-part-2-verdict-cheap-cables-keep-upusually-268788.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-+-grand-finale-part-iii-282725.php

The thing to keep in mind here is that it is MonsterCable engineers that ran the tests on the 3 different cable brands and various lengths. Also, be aware that there are things that improve cable performance in real applications, such as cable equalization that can take a cable that should fail based on the "eye" test and make it work fine in the real application. Also, not all HDMI sources are equal in their capability to drive an HDMI cable of a given length. There is some suspicion that MonsterCable engineers could've chosen the PS3 as the source because they knew that it was one of the worst HDMI cable drivers. I don't know that it is, or isnt, but a skeptic.......

P.J.

I especially like this conclusion: "The only people who should buy Monster cable are people who light cigars with Benjamins."

Some of those tests are ridiculous...1440P=who cares. If or when we ever have 1440P I will just buy a newer $5 cable that can handle it.

I'm sure that most everybody must've seen this by now, but I suppose it's been forgotten?

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/field-notes/the-truth-about-monster-cable-266616.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-part-2-verdict-cheap-cables-keep-upusually-268788.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-+-grand-finale-part-iii-282725.php

The thing to keep in mind here is that it is MonsterCable engineers that ran the tests on the 3 different cable brands and various lengths. Also, be aware that there are things that improve cable performance in real applications, such as cable equalization that can take a cable that should fail based on the "eye" test and make it work fine in the real application. Also, not all HDMI sources are equal in their capability to drive an HDMI cable of a given length. There is some suspicion that MonsterCable engineers could've chosen the PS3 as the source because they knew that it was one of the worst HDMI cable drivers. I don't know that it is, or isnt, but a skeptic.......

P.J.

I'm sure that most everybody must've seen this by now, but I suppose it's been forgotten?

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/field-notes/the-truth-about-monster-cable-266616.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-part-2-verdict-cheap-cables-keep-upusually-268788.php

http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/hdmi-cable-battlemodo/the-truth-about-monster-cable-+-grand-finale-part-iii-282725.php

The thing to keep in mind here is that it is MonsterCable engineers that ran the tests on the 3 different cable brands and various lengths. Also, be aware that there are things that improve cable performance in real applications, such as cable equalization that can take a cable that should fail based on the "eye" test and make it work fine in the real application. Also, not all HDMI sources are equal in their capability to drive an HDMI cable of a given length. There is some suspicion that MonsterCable engineers could've chosen the PS3 as the source because they knew that it was one of the worst HDMI cable drivers. I don't know that it is, or isnt, but a skeptic.......

P.J.

Yea but this is running on the belief that Monoprice are "cheap" cables. Are they inexpensive? Yup, that isn't the same as cheap. They're all very well-made, are certified just as Monster cables are, and their new cables meet the HDMI 1.3 spec. On top of that their are plenty of videophiles on AVS who use Monoprice and have zero problems with them even on very larger (100"+) 1080p screens. Assuming their is some magical increase in picture quality even stepping up to say a $40 cable it's so minute that it crossed in to the realm of diminishing returns miles back.

Yea but this is running on the belief that Monoprice are "cheap" cables. Are they inexpensive? Yup, that isn't the same as cheap. They're all very well-made, are certified just as Monster cables are, and their new cables meet the HDMI 1.3 spec. On top of that their are plenty of videophiles on AVS who use Monoprice and have zero problems with them even on very larger (100"+) 1080p screens. Assuming their is some magical increase in picture quality even stepping up to say a $40 cable it's so minute that it crossed in to the realm of diminishing returns miles back.

In terms of price, the tests showed that a mid-priced cable was outperformed by both low priced and high priced cables. So, I don't think that we can draw any conclusions as to the price of a cable being a good predictor of performance. If we can really trust that a given cable manufacturer/supplier won't change the construction of their cables without changing the part number, then we can make an informed decision from among the cables tested. For other cables for which we have no data, we cannot make an informed decision. I would not trust that all cables from a manufacturer have similar class performance, just as I wouldn't use price as a performance predictor.

P.J.

If or when we ever have 1440P I will just buy a newer $5 cable that can handle it.

Multiples in fact:D

Yea but this is running on the belief that Monoprice are "cheap" cables.

It's $5. That tells you instantly that it isn't made well, and that QC is non-existent other than the most base functionality. That is why I submit that they're unreliable, disposable, and cannot have a predictable performance. Thus the recommendation that the $5 (!) cable be examined prior to the jack on the TV. Although (this time) it wasn't the cable, given the cost and things I've witnessed in the past it was a reasonable assumption.

Again...price does not equate to quality. Your Monster branded cables are made in China just like every other HDMI cable in existence (save BJC Series 1, which is made in USA and assembled in China). The only difference is that Monster's marketing has brainwashed you and many other consumers and bought their way into exclusivity at the big box retailers by promising huge profit margins. It is no coincidence that you can't just walk into a local Best Buy, Circuit City, or other store and purchase a $5 HDMI cable. The margins are too thin. If they only stock the $100 cables and they can make the fat margins they will get every joe shmoe to buy them because they just think that is what an HDMI cable is worth. Most people don't even know what the hell an HDMI cable is, let alone where to find one at prices where to don't have to bend over and lube up.


It's $5. That tells you instantly that it isn't made well, and that QC is non-existent other than the most base functionality. That is why I submit that they're unreliable, disposable, and cannot have a predictable performance. Thus the recommendation that the $5 (!) cable be examined prior to the jack on the TV. Although (this time) it wasn't the cable, given the cost and things I've witnessed in the past it was a reasonable assumption.

Multiples in fact:D



It's $5. That tells you instantly that it isn't made well, and that QC is non-existent other than the most base functionality. That is why I submit that they're unreliable, disposable, and cannot have a predictable performance. Thus the recommendation that the $5 (!) cable be examined prior to the jack on the TV. Although (this time) it wasn't the cable, given the cost and things I've witnessed in the past it was a reasonable assumption.

Again, the fact that they're so poorly made and prone to defects is obviously why just about every videophile and audiophile on this forum swears by them [/sarcasm].

You can argue that their poorly built cables, prone to defects, and don't work well all you want but you can't argue results. Myself as well as many others on this forum have their entire systems wired with Monoprice cables and can tell you they're not poorly built, in fact all of them I've had have been just as sturdy as any Monster cable I've ever owned minus the chore of needing a hammer and a pair of pliers to plug them in and unplug. I'm also pretty sure if there was any degradation to signal quality someone would have picked up on it by now and given us some screenshots showing us the difference, and a couple test patterns being run by Monster labs don't count. It's pretty rare I even hear of someone getting a busted cable, thankfully when they do Monoprice has a 21 day replacement policy.

So I say again inexpensive does not equal cheap.

It's $5. That tells you instantly that it isn't made well, and that QC is non-existent other than the most base functionality. That is why I submit that they're unreliable, disposable, and cannot have a predictable performance.

As many already pointed out to you, you're simply spread FUD here. You have no facts to back up your claim. Period.

I have bought almost a dozen Monoprice HDMI cables and none of them are unreliable or defective. I have used them with my Monoprice 4x1 HDMI switch (again, costs less than 1/4 of the similar products out there) and two HDTVs with signals ranging from 480i (from my cable box) to 1080p (XBox 360 HD DVD playback). Flawless.

$5 is about 350 Yuan (Chinese currency) which is roughly how much they pay a factory worker there for a week (at most). It certainly doesn't take each worker one week to make one quality HDMI cable. The material cost of these cables is very low when you mass produce them. I'd speculate Monoprice get them at around $1 ~ 2 range. Monster cable probably get their cables from the same factory with fancier paint job and different connector but I'd guess no more than $3 to 5 a piece.

As many already pointed out to you, you're simply spread FUD here. You have no facts to back up your claim. Period.

I have bought almost a dozen Monoprice HDMI cables and none of them are unreliable or defective. I have used them with my Monoprice 4x1 HDMI switch (again, costs less than 1/4 of the similar products out there) and two HDTVs with signals ranging from 480i (from my cable box) to 1080p (XBox 360 HD DVD playback). Flawless.

$5 is about 350 Yuan (Chinese currency) which is roughly how much they pay a factory worker there for a week (at most). It certainly doesn't take each worker one week to make one quality HDMI cable. The material cost of these cables is very low when you mass produce them. I'd speculate Monoprice get them at around $1 ~ 2 range. Monster cable probably get their cables from the same factory with fancier paint job and different connector but I'd guess no more than $3 to 5 a piece.

But but but.... Monster cables have nitrogen injected tips :rolleyes:

As many already pointed out to you, you're simply spread FUD here. You have no facts to back up your claim. Period.

It's fairly safe to say that if any other product had such a huge gulf in cost then the cheaper one would be suspect. I also see many accusing components of faulty inputs, along with devices. And although one individual's Samsung indeed had a bad input, I seriously find the situation suspect when cables like this are in such widespread use on this forum, yet only on this forum do I hear of complaints regarding "faulty" HDMI ports on gear.

Do the math.

$5 is about 350 Yuan (Chinese currency) which is roughly how much they pay a factory worker there for a week (at most). It certainly doesn't take each worker one week to make one quality HDMI cable. The material cost of these cables is very low when you mass produce them. I'd speculate Monoprice get them at around $1 ~ 2 range. Monster cable probably get their cables from the same factory with fancier paint job and different connector but I'd guess no more than $3 to 5 a piece.

We're discussing QC, which isn't governed by the workers. Who does the QC for Mono? I am genuinely curious.

It's fairly safe to say that if any other product had such a huge gulf in cost then the cheaper one would be suspect. I also see many accusing components of faulty inputs, along with devices. And although one individual's Samsung indeed had a bad input, I seriously find the situation suspect when cables like this are in such widespread use on this forum, yet only on this forum do I hear of complaints regarding "faulty" HDMI ports on gear.

Do the math.



We're discussing QC, which isn't governed by the workers. Who does the QC for Mono? I am genuinely curious.

And much like this question most of those faulty HDMI ports have been tested with multiple cables and proved to be just that: faulty HDMI ports. **** doesn't always work that's the way of it.

Btw who does the QC for Monster, I'm genuinely curious.

Do you work in Marketing for Monster??? I am genuinely curious. That seems to be the only way that someone could be such a schill for such an overpriced product.

Seriously, let's assume that 1% of all Monoprice cables (or Blue Jeans Tartan) are bad (I think that # is way too high as I have never had a bad one). Let's also assume that due to Monster's amazing QC that you allude to that 100% of their cables are good (not likely). Why not buy the reasonably priced cable for $4-5 per cable and then return (or toss if you don't want to wait for a ruturn) the 1 defective cable out of 100. The 100 cables, plus 1 extra to replace the defective one, would cost $404-$505. The Monster cables would cost you $10,000 at $100 per cable (10 foot HDMI?). I am just guessing at that price as I haven't bought a Monster cable in years...ever since I quit buying my cables at Best Buy/Circuit City. Please tell me why this doesn't make sense schticker.

It's fairly safe to say that if any other product had such a huge gulf in cost then the cheaper one would be suspect. I also see many accusing components of faulty inputs, along with devices. And although one individual's Samsung indeed had a bad input, I seriously find the situation suspect when cables like this are in such widespread use on this forum, yet only on this forum do I hear of complaints regarding "faulty" HDMI ports on gear.

Do the math.



We're discussing QC, which isn't governed by the workers. Who does the QC for Mono? I am genuinely curious.

It's fairly safe to say that if any other product had such a huge gulf in cost then the cheaper one would be suspect.

For example, Sony products are always much more expensive than competing brands and yet, Sony quality (or QC as you like to mention) is always on the bottom. I always like to take Sony price and devide it by 10 and compare that to the similarly priced item on other brands. Works in most cases :)


We're discussing QC, which isn't governed by the workers. Who does the QC for Mono? I am genuinely curious.

QC is usually done at the factory. Do you really think with only 10 ppl who work for Monster here in States, there will be enough resourcesto do the QC? j/k.

This is taken directly off of Monster Cable's website:

"At the top end of the scale, cable and interconnect pricing bears little relationship to the cost of designing and manufacturing the product. Unlike other audio products, whose retail prices are largely determined by the parts cost (the retail price is typically four to six times the cost of raw parts), cables and interconnects are sometimes priced according to what the market will bear. This trend began when one company set its prices vastly higher than everyone else's-and saw its sales skyrocket as a result. Other manufacturers then raised their prices so they wouldn't be perceived as being of lower quality."

"Again, I must stress that high cost doesn't guarantee that the cable is good or that it will work well in your system. Don't automatically assume that an expensive cable is better than a low-priced one."

http://monstercable.com/RobertHarley/ch11_p03.asp

It's fairly safe to say that if any other product had such a huge gulf in cost then the cheaper one would be suspect. I also see many accusing components of faulty inputs, along with devices. And although one individual's Samsung indeed had a bad input, I seriously find the situation suspect when cables like this are in such widespread use on this forum, yet only on this forum do I hear of complaints regarding "faulty" HDMI ports on gear.

Do the math.

"At the top end of the scale, cable and interconnect pricing bears little relationship to the cost of designing and manufacturing the product. Unlike other audio products, whose retail prices are largely determined by the parts cost (the retail price is typically four to six times the cost of raw parts), cables and interconnects are sometimes priced according to what the market will bear.

Not only is this not groundbreaking economic news about what the market will bear, ultimately it's irrelevant to the discussion. We aren't talking about whether high-priced items = far better performance; we're discussing at what point does a super-inexpensive product have to be examined further. People on here buy the product due to price, end of story. The fact that (usually) is "works" is great from a functionality point, but certainly not a performance perspective. But of course the Monster herring gets trotted out again:rolleyes:.

And BTW - If I worked for Monster I would certainly be a little more discreet about the point. You would agree with me and think it's your idea.;)

Not only is this not groundbreaking economic news about what the market will bear, ultimately it's irrelevant to the discussion. We aren't talking about whether high-priced items = far better performance; we're discussing at what point does a super-inexpensive product have to be examined further. People on here buy the product due to price, end of story. The fact that (usually) is "works" is great from a functionality point, but certainly not a performance perspective. But of course the Monster herring gets trotted out again:rolleyes:.

And BTW - If I worked for Monster I would certainly be a little more discreet about the point. You would agree with me and think it's your idea.;)

I say again because you're apparently not hearing it. Monoprice works, Monoprice works well, Monoprice are well built cables. I know this from purchasing a number of fine cables from them that perform spectacularly and are incredibly well built, and I'm not alone most of the people on this forum have had the same experience. We buy it not just because it's cheap but because it's an excellent product.

How is that irrelevant to the discussion. Monster is not a significantly better product than a Monoprice or BJC cable. I would argue it is a worse product than BJC Series 1. Monster is priced at outrageious prices not because it is a better product or performs better...it is simply what the market will bear when you account for the fact that there are no cheaper alternatives sold at major outlets. People who know better don't waste their money.

Not only is this not groundbreaking economic news about what the market will bear, ultimately it's irrelevant to the discussion. We aren't talking about whether high-priced items = far better performance; we're discussing at what point does a super-inexpensive product have to be examined further. People on here buy the product due to price, end of story. The fact that (usually) is "works" is great from a functionality point, but certainly not a performance perspective. But of course the Monster herring gets trotted out again:rolleyes:.

And BTW - If I worked for Monster I would certainly be a little more discreet about the point. You would agree with me and think it's your idea.;)

How is that irrelevant to the discussion. Monster is not a significantly better product than a Monoprice or BJC cable. I would argue it is a worse product than BJC Series 1. Monster is priced at outrageious prices not because it is a better product or performs better...it is simply what the market will bear when you account for the fact that there are no cheaper alternatives sold at major outlets. People who know better don't waste their money.

I would argue Monoprice is a superior product simply because I've never had a Monoprice cable murder an input on my TV. Wish I could say the same for Monster.

My friend of mine says he sees "sparkles" on his Plasma after he takes 'shrooms. :)

I had a similar experience with a Monster component cable on my first HDTV...an XBR-400 CRT. The component inputs got pulled so hard when I removed a cable that it pulled it away from the board and I had to get it repaired.

I would argue Monoprice is a superior product simply because I've never had a Monoprice cable murder an input on my TV. Wish I could say the same for Monster.

I had a similar experience with a Monster component cable on my first HDTV...an XBR-400 CRT. The component inputs got pulled so hard when I removed a cable that it pulled it away from the board and I had to get it repaired.

That must've been a low quality HDTV. No expensive, high quality TV would've been damaged by a Monster Cable. :)

P.J.

lol...I wish it were. I paid more for that TV than I did for my latest 60 inch SXRD. It was a great picture, but once HDTV became more common, I hated the fact that it was 4:3.

That must've been a low quality HDTV. No expensive, high quality TV would've been damaged by a Monster Cable. :)

P.J.

Thanks to anyone who actually contributed to my thread. And to everyone else, quit playing with the moron trolls who buy Monster cables.

Thanks to anyone who actually contributed to my thread. And to everyone else, quit playing with the moron trolls who buy Monster cables.

What one buys is irrelevant. That doesn't affect actual build quality, which is an objective thing.

And I like how you call anyone not buying the lowest common denominator in cabling "morons"--which of course is based on what other people on here say and is parroted by people like yourself with virtually no firsthand applicative experience with anything else.

What one buys is irrelevant. That doesn't affect actual build quality, which is an objective thing.

And I like how you call anyone not buying the lowest common denominator in cabling "morons"--which of course is based on what other people on here say and is parroted by people like yourself with virtually no firsthand applicative experience with anything else.

Apparently you can't read, because I didn't mention anything about buying the "lowest common denominator." Also, you're spouting out about me, without knowing anything about me. I've spent several years working with music recording, and everyone who isn't a fool in that industry also realizes that Monster brand is a huge waste of money. I've entered this forum to learn about the video aspect of things, and it's the same story. Monster is a waste - if it makes you feel better defending them, fine. In this instance, we're talking about digital signals, and I'd be hard pressed to purchase anything above medium expense unless I'm running extremely long distances. Analog, yeah I'm going higher quality. High end Monster analog isn't bad, but for it's cost, you can do much better. It's a mainstream oversaturated product through effective advertising. It is not the best. Not close.

Again, thank you for further propagating the tangential subject of my thread.

Apparently you can't read, because I didn't mention anything about buying the "lowest common denominator." Also, you're spouting out about me, without knowing anything about me.

Not implicitly, no. How many cookie cutter posts like yours do I have to read over a ten-year period to understand the gist?:rolleyes:

I've spent several years working with music recording, and everyone who isn't a fool in that industry also realizes that Monster brand is a huge waste of money. I've entered this forum to learn about the video aspect of things, and it's the same story. Monster is a waste - if it makes you feel better defending them, fine.

Monster subsidizes the nice low prices on the TVs everyone loves by placing lost margin back into the retailers' pockets they didn't earn on the sets. In this video-dominated marketplace, retailers need companies like that for survival. Therefore the consumer needs them by extension. Don't like it? Good luck checking out new sets through pix on the net.

The fact that their stuff is nice helps too.

In this instance, we're talking about digital signals, and I'd be hard pressed to purchase anything above medium expense unless I'm running extremely long distances.

To a certain degree yes. Not however to the extremes discussed.

Analog, yeah I'm going higher quality. High end Monster analog isn't bad, but for it's cost, you can do much better. It's a mainstream oversaturated product through effective advertising. It is not the best. Not close.

Where is this advertising again? The debate (although it's the strawman of choice for those lacking any substantive arguments on this forum) is not about Monster. The issue is about the cheapest stuff on the planet in relation to EVERYTHING else.

Again, thank you for further propagating the tangential subject of my thread.

And thank you for proving everything I've said about anti-Monster lemmings and their no-substance arguments.

I'm heading to Best Buy now... gotta make sure they get their "lost margin" back. :rolleyes: The bottom line: while their product may not be too bad, the markup on their products is sickening. Btw, who defends Monster anyway? Or a cable manufacturer for that matter? What is your bias with them, if I may ask?
----------------------

So, no updates yet on the original topic of this thread.

Well I have this "sparkle" issue on my Sharp LCD with my PS3 under certain circumstances. If I hook my PS3 directly to my station via HDMI to watch a Blu-ray it is fine. However if I have it hooked through my HDMI switch I get the sparkles and they stay. Plus every 10 seconds or so the sound skips for a split second. I am using the same type of cables, ans have tried multiple cables. I have even tried two different switches, and my current one is a fairly new HDMI 1.3 blah blah...should be up to all the current specs.

I had the same problem and for me the problem had nothing to do with resolution but rather the connection terminals. A wiggle of the cable head and the sparkles disapeared, definately a poor connection!

It's not the cables, don't buy expensive cables. It's the length of the cable and the digital signal itself. I have Mitsubishi and other brand name products. This is a universal digital HDMI issue. You need an HDMI booster. The HDMI Booster family extends the length of any HDMI cable by regenerating the HDMI signal before it outputs to the HDMI monitor or projector. The HDMI Booster will clean out the digital noise (sparkles) in your picture. Just put a 3 foot one on the end of it and into your unit. They are cheap, anywhere from $15 on up. I paid $24.95 on ebay. Go to this place to read up on them. hdtvsupply.com/hdaceqexreex.html
Solved my problems completely!!

I'm using 1 meter Gefen cables. I'm getting sparkles on certain channels and not others. The signal is being passed through my JVC D-VHS deck from DVR. I would think a cable issue would affect all channels.

I'm using 1 meter Gefen cables. I'm getting sparkles on certain channels and not others. The signal is being passed through my JVC D-VHS deck from DVR. I would think a cable issue would affect all channels.

Are you viewing Twilight on the channel with the sparkles? That could be the problem. :D

Wow. What an old thread this is. Fun to read though because somebody was being a huge douche.