Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > DVD Discussions > DVD & Home Theater Gear
Reload this Page >

Does length really matter?

DVD & Home Theater Gear Discuss DVD and Home Theater Equipment.

Does length really matter?

Old 01-18-01, 03:11 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I bought two sets of $19.99 monster cables from Target. They are each 15 feet long. The combined distance from my DVD player to my receiver, and from my receiver to my TV is less than 5 feet! Am I losing quality?
Old 01-18-01, 03:20 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Chicago
Posts: 4,214
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My thought is you should only buy the length you need. If that 5 feet then I believe they sell 6ft cables.
I believe you do loose some quality, but it might not be noticible. You also could suscept that cable to noise.

------------------
Mike
Old 01-18-01, 04:24 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Reviewer Emeritus
 
Jason Bovberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 3,412
Received 66 Likes on 47 Posts
From what I've heard, it's girth that really matters. Of cables, I mean.
Old 01-18-01, 04:27 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Phew! Glad that's cleared up - I thought this was a thread that should belong in the Other forum
Old 01-18-01, 05:09 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: 3rd Planet from the Sun
Posts: 3,701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's not the size, it's how you use it.
Old 01-18-01, 05:27 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Hero
 
El Scorcho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 39,629
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
From a circuitry standpoint, the longer a cable is that passes a signal, the more resistance that cable has, and thus, the signal to be transmitted will attenuate more and will be more susceptible to outside noise. Over long distances, this attenuation can cause serious loss of signal. However, with 15 ft., you're not going to be able to discern a noticeable difference in signal quality through your speakers. If you were trying to run this cable underground and over to your neighbor's HT -- that might be a different story.

------------------
Sex is like air. It's not important unless you aren't getting any.
Old 01-18-01, 09:24 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Suburbia
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I thought of several crude responses but unfortunately I wasn't able to get it up quick enough.

-Gonnosuke
Old 01-18-01, 09:53 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Here's all you need to know on this subject:

The signal from your receiver travels to your speakers at roughly the speed of sound (299,792,458 meters per second). Now when you're sending this through a 15 ft cable (4.572 m) the signal would take roughly 0.00000001525 s to get there. With a 6 ft cable (1.8288 m) the signal takes 0.0000000061 seconds. If you think you'll be able to tell the difference between them go for it. But I doubt you'd be able to tell the difference between a 300 ft cable and a 3 ft cable (as long as their clean and not broken in any places).

That's the main concern with longer cables. Signal degredation, but that will only occur in shitty cables or cables exceeding 100 ft. You'll be fine with whatever you use...
Old 01-19-01, 08:36 PM
  #9  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: st paul mn
Posts: 2,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
quote:<HR>Originally posted by PoorBoy:
Here's all you need to know on this subject:

The signal from your receiver travels to your speakers at roughly the speed of sound (299,792,458 meters per second.
<HR>


If you meant to say speed of "light", it would be about 300,000 km/sec. I have never seen it expressed in meters before. But I'm not certain that the velocity through copper wire would be the same as that through a vacuum.

edited because I was duh



[This message has been edited by LtlPhysics (edited January 19, 2001).]
Old 01-19-01, 08:49 PM
  #10  
DVD Talk Hero
 
El Scorcho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 39,629
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
quote:<HR>Originally posted by LtlPhysics:
If you meant to say speed of "light", it would be about 300,000,000 km/sec, which is a lot faster. But I'm not certain that the velocity through copper wire would be the same as that through a vacuum.

<HR>



You are correct. The speed of light in free space is roughly 3 x 10^8 m/s, where as the speed of light in any other medium is governed by the relative permittivity of that medium (usually denoted as epsilon).


------------------
Sex is like air. It's not important unless you aren't getting any.
Old 01-19-01, 10:31 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Blacksburg, VA
Posts: 1,566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah, my bad. I meant speed of light. The speed of sound is pathetic in comparison. But I think my post even in it's errors made it's point.

And I know it's not km/s, I'm really sure it's m/s.
Old 01-19-01, 11:21 PM
  #12  
DVD Talk Hero
 
El Scorcho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 39,629
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
it is 3 x 10^8 m/s, poorboy, you are right.

------------------
Sex is like air. It's not important unless you aren't getting any.
Old 01-20-01, 12:51 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Gold Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: st paul mn
Posts: 2,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry guys, I had to correct my post, I lost it. I've been watching Fox News too much.

------------------
Throttle, more throttle

You know, with the speed of light so close to 300,000 km/sec, why not adjust the meter just a little to equal exactly 300,000 km/sec.= c. The metric system is all arbitrary anyway and in the real world, how would that impact Olympic scoring?

299,792,458/300,000,000=.999308193...
300,000,000/299,792,458=1.000692286...

The kilo is based on what, some cylinder of metal in Paris? We could start a movement to base the meter on something that really is a constant of nature.

*our eight fingers and two thumbs are a given.



[This message has been edited by LtlPhysics (edited January 19, 2001).]
Old 01-20-01, 02:21 AM
  #14  
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 11,459
Received 149 Likes on 120 Posts
quote:<HR>Originally posted by LtlPhysics:
Sorry guys, I had to correct my post, I lost it. I've been watching Fox News too much.
<HR>


Watch out. The symptoms of having to think about things and draw your own conclusions are starting to show.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.