Coaxial TV Antenna Cable - Does Cheap = Nasty?

eckorock on 02/02/2015 - 23:22

Is there any REAL difference between the cheap coax TV antenna cables and the 'high quality' ones?
(gold plated, braided cable, etc etc)

For example today @ Good Guys I bought a $4 1.5m TV antenna cable from the bargain bin, but had the salesperson try to talk me into buying the $14 one.

When I checked the packaging, both cables are made by the same company and have the same factory address ! (Crest QLD)

cheap cable:
http://www.thegoodguys.com.au/gva-coaxial-antenna-cable-3m-g…

expensive cable:
http://www.thegoodguys.com.au/crest-antenna-flylead-with-ada…

I'm not an electronic expert but I am cynical so I bought the cheap one … worst case scenario the cheap antenna cable is no good and I lose a few bucks. maybe.

But then again - Maybe I am wrong and the digital TV signal won't be any good with the cheap antenna cable.
Interested to hear opinions / experiences

Electrical & Electronics

Comments

  • Cheeper on 02/02/2015 - 23:50

    It's all about signal loss. Better quality cables have less loss over the distance of the cable.
    If you are in a good reception area then the cheap cable may do the job for you.

  • scrimshaw on 02/02/2015 - 23:56
    +2

    Did you plug it in? Did it work? Was there any visible interference or jitter in your digital signals? If no, why are you are worrying yourself with buyer's remorse?

    1.5m is extremely short though and it's unlikely that you will need quad shielding on a cable less than 3 meters.

  • GnarlyKnuckles on 02/02/2015 - 23:58

    I'm not an expert either but I do know a thing or two about it. Over such a tiny distance (1.5 m), I reckon you made absolutely the right decision in going with the cheaper one. I reckon there would be no detectable difference between what you see with the one you bought, and what you'd see with the $14 one the dude tried to sell you. If you were sending the signal 10 or 20 metres though, you might actually find that there is a detectable difference in quality and/or susceptibility to interference, between the cheap version and the more exy (better 'insulated'/ 'balanced'/ 'constructed') product.
    As I said I'm by not means an expert on this, so I'm very happy to stand corrected, by anyone that is.
    IMHO though, you made a wise decision.

    How does the picture look, btw?

  • GnarlyKnuckles on 03/02/2015 - 00:02
    +4

    Chuckle, I always spend so long constructing my answers that upon posting them, I discover that I'm inadvertently reiterating sommat someone else (usually scrimmers) has already said, a bit more concisely.

    Damn you and your "short-n-sweet" posts, scrimmers! ;-P

  • grog on 03/02/2015 - 00:29
    +1

    I know a lot about coax cables.

    This statement by good guys " its gold plated connectors will deliver brilliant signal transfer."

    Is gold plated bulls**t.

    These cables will be 75 ohm impedance made by the millions in china for the worldwide consumer market.

    You have nothing to worry about unless somebody in the shops damaged the cable then shoved it in the bargain bin.

  • Sage on 03/02/2015 - 01:03

    I'm with scrimshaw, you tell us, does it work well?
    I suspect it will still result in a perfect connection.

    • eckorock on 06/02/2015 - 21:38
      +2

      yep :)

  • [Deactivated] on 03/02/2015 - 02:53

    I read this the other day. Title says it all. Worth a look.

    'Crest' has never been a brand that I would associate with distributing anything much above 'adequate', but one would hope that even that cheap 'GVA' labelled cable you purchased reaches at least a basic standard - at least relative to some of the cables highlighted in that article I linked above, anyway…

  • eckorock on 06/02/2015 - 21:38

    The $4 antenna cable works perfectly fine , btw …

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join