Hmmm, this article seems like a "borderline" Monster Cable marketing piece. I do commend the author for at least attempting to be somewhat neutral when possible (as opposed to overt gushing of the wonders of Monster Cable).
One suspect issue I have is noting that the quality of the comb filter that actually is in use will greatly determine how good or bad the composite cable images compare to the S-video cable images. That comb filter will depend on your particular TV set, not the one that comes with a certain ATI videocard with composite video input port. Back in the 90's, the particular comb filter in use could make or break the image quality on a TV set- suffice to say, all comb filters are not created equally. So it isn't exactly clear if the comb filter performance demonstrated on the ATI videocard in these tests is really representative of the comb filter part that is in your TV. Of course, if you are using an exclusive S-video setup for your entire entertainment system, you circumvent this altogether (which is undoubtedly a bonus). I just wanted to chime in that image quality using composite hookup could be better or worse than what was depicted in that article. It all depends on the quality of parts in the TV set. The actual cable itself is actually a minor contributor to the situation, believe it or not.
The author was treading a slippery slope when discussing audio jitter. I'm glad he steered clear of the usual high-end cable rhetoric.
