Any thoughts on the AudioQuest Sub-3 DBS Subwoofer cable?

gfong

Just picked up a AudiQuest Sub-3 DBS Subwoofer cable off Audiogon and was wondering if anyone has used one before or has comments on it?

Could not find any reviews on them. I will be using it on a SVS PB-12 NSD.

Erik Tracy

gfong wrote: »

Just picked up a AudiQuest Sub-3 DBS Subwoofer cable off Audiogon and was wondering if anyone has used one before or has comments on it?

Could not find any reviews on them. I will be using it on a SVS PB-12 NSD.

I think you should buy one and do a review for us! :biggrin:

C'mon....you know you want that cable, and you would be giving your fellow Polkies a review to help us out!

gfong

Erik Tracy wrote: »

I think you should buy one and do a review for us! :biggrin:

C'mon....you know you want that cable, and you would be giving your fellow Polkies a review to help us out!

lol.... Well I bought one, just gotta wait for it in the mail. It is AudioQuests top end sub cable so I am hoping I get an advantage over the cable I am using now. For the cable doubters, it will at least look "Fonzie" cool!

I will do a little review once it's hooked up!

The cable that I will be comparing it to is a generic cable that the SVS dealer gave me when I purchased the sub.

gfong

no one using this cable or have thoughts on it?

Theheadsn

Im just wondering with cables like these; I know there top of the line, but unless your running a top of the line setup, from point a to z, isnt it kind of a moot point?

I would love to get my hands on some audioquest cables, but there so expensive. It gets hard to justify such a high end purchase for a mid range system (like i have)

But let us know how it works on your sub, im interested

gfong

Theheadsn wrote: »

Im just wondering with cables like these; I know there top of the line, but unless your running a top of the line setup, from point a to z, isnt it kind of a moot point?

But let us know how it works on your sub, im interested

I was wondering the same as you and that is why I purchased it. Initially I was looking at the Audioquest Sub-1 cable for 139.00 plus shipping and then saw on Audiogon a Audioquest Sub-3 cable for 150.00 delivered.

The cable lists for $295.00 so I did not pass it up. We will see how it sounds.

samnor

Havent tried these AQ cables. However, I tried a few lower end cables including bluejeans, and a tributaries series 7 and the el cheapo monoprice version. Somehow neither made as much difference in my rig than when I upgraded the stock 14AWG power cord to a signal cable magic power cord... the power cord really enhanced the bass...YMMV

gfong

Hooked up the cable, ran the set-up from the Sony ES AVR and tested it out on a couple of Blu-Ray movies and some SACD multi-channel music.

Well shielded cable, sturdy, well constructed ends with ground lead wire on each end and Audioquest's DBS proprietary little dew hickey black box thing with a battery in it!

List price is $295.00.

Popped in War of the Worlds opening scene and noticed right off the bat that the bass sounded flatter, but better! When all heck breaks loose in the opening scene, I honestly could not tell the difference.
Where I did notice a difference was on the one off big hits or bass sounds that were present. They sounded more controlled and not as reflective.

Next up was Master and Commander, not as earth shattering as War of the Worlds, but definitely a sub woofer work out and very tight thwacks from canyons and busting hulls of ships.

Same results with this movie, the bass was more controlled, and sounded better. Canon shots rang out and did not continue after the shot was fired. I guess "controlled" would be a word I could use or in comparison to a light going on and off, unlike a fluorescent bulb continuing to stay lit for a little longer.

Next up was a favourite SACD of mine, "This Side" by the band "Nickel Creek". Very bluegrass/folksy sound. Excellent multi-channel tracks that are not over done in the rear channels.

I run multi-channel direct with SACD and let the player decide other than speaker distance what to use without processing the signal from the AVR.

Tracks sounded really nice and when the bass came in I noticed the same as with the movie soundtracks. Seems the cable likes to tame the bass down, but give it a more defined or refined sound.

So... where are my thoughts on the cable? I would not recommend purchasing this cable at full price if you have a mediocre cable already.

The sonic difference between the $40.00 cable I was using and the $300.00 cable is not worth it IMO. I paid half of that price and I am glad that I did.

I am using the cable with a SVS PB12-NSD sub. Maybe if I had a better sub I would get a better result, who knows. I do know that my sub works flawlessly and I am very happy with it.

I recently upgraded my front stage with Audioquest speaker cables and I did notice a substantial sound improvement by using them.
I also upgraded my power cords to Audioquest and noticed a noticeable improvement.
I guess I am in the cable upgrade camp, but did not see enough performance improvement from the Audioquest Sub-3 cable like I did with the other upgrades.

This does not mean that I do not like the cable, the sound was upgraded and is now controlled more which I really like; I just do not see the price to performance ratio at MSRP. At the 150.00 pricec I paid including delivery, I am happy with the cable and would recommend it.

With the recent controversial thread that I started with the "Do you use a sub for 2 channel music" (lol) I am going to give that a try and see how it does with my record collection and using a sub!

Thanks for reading!

Ern Dog

Interesting results. Thanks for the write up.

I have a couple sub cables (Audioquest and Monster sub cable) but right now I'm using RCA interconnect "DH Labs air Matrix" cables instead. They sound good on the sub.

gfong

Ern Dog wrote: »

Interesting results. Thanks for the write up.

I have a couple sub cables (Audioquest and Monster sub cable) but right now I'm using RCA interconnect "DH Labs air Matrix" cables instead. They sound good on the sub.

Thanks, yea, don't get me wrong, the cable is a noticable upgrade over what I had; I just think it is a tad expensive for the results that I saw!

Erik Tracy

Thanks for the write up.

I guess one could say that there is a point of diminishing returns on sonic improvements, but if you want to pursue them there is an associated cost.

For some, that small step up is very important to them and so, it is worth the cost.

No one should believe this hobby is cheap!

The rewarding part is in finding a worthwhile upgrade at a bargain price.:biggrin:

gfong

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Thanks for the write up.

I guess one could say that there is a point of diminishing returns on sonic improvements, but if you want to pursue them there is an associated cost.

For some, that small step up is very important to them and so, it is worth the cost.

No one should believe this hobby is cheap!

The rewarding part is in finding a worthwhile upgrade at a bargain price.:biggrin:

Very good and true points, each system and person have their own budget and what makes a difference threshold.

I have a middle of the road system and used a high end cable only because of the price I paid for it. I initially was looking at the Sub-1 cable for 139.00 and but could not pass on a slightly used Sub-3 cable for $11 more!

I am sure on a higher end system and with more time to listen, my thoughts and review may change!

samnor

Thats something I've pondered about. Upgrading IC's between preamp/amp certainly improves the sound a heck of a lot more in my system than when I upgraded my subwoofer interconnect. It may have something to do with the limited frequencies (i.e low end only) that goes to the sub whereas you have a comparatively large frequency spectrum going from the preamp to the amp. It might be a tad bit more difficult to observe an improvement given the limited range, atleast it was for me. As gfong pointed out, upgrading other things like the PC on a sub had bigger impact, something that I also found in my rig. But its always true that YMMV,

Erik Tracy

samnor wrote: »

Thats something I've pondered about. Upgrading IC's between preamp/amp certainly improves the sound a heck of a lot more in my system than when I upgraded my subwoofer interconnect. It may have something to do with the limited frequencies (i.e low end only) that goes to the sub whereas you have a comparatively large frequency spectrum going from the preamp to the amp. It might be a tad bit more difficult to observe an improvement given the limited range, atleast it was for me. As gfong pointed out, upgrading other things like the PC on a sub had bigger impact, something that I also found in my rig. But its always true that YMMV,

True dat.

I played with some different ICs from my source (SACD player) to integrated amp and noticed a startling difference in bass response across the 4 ICs I tried - much more so than when I swapped ICs to my sub.

gfong

Erik Tracy wrote: »

True dat.

I played with some different ICs from my source (SACD player) to integrated amp and noticed a startling difference in bass response across the 4 ICs I tried - much more so than when I swapped ICs to my sub.

I ran 6 Atlas cables from my SACD to my AVR and noticed a nice improvement as well.

With all my interconnect swaps the Sub has been the less noticable.

MADGSF

I use an Audioquest Sub-X cable in my system, previously used a Monster Cable and SVS cable. To my ears the Monster cable was bloated and the bass sounded like one note. The SVS was not as one note as the Monster but was to me still a little bloated. The Audioquest made my sub more articulate to my ears and the bass was not bloated at all. At the price I paid for the AQ new ~65.00 it was well worth the money to me.

gfong

MADGSF wrote: »

I use an Audioquest Sub-X cable in my system, previously used a Monster Cable and SVS cable. To my ears the Monster cable was bloated and the bass sounded like one note. The SVS was not as one note as the Monster but was to me still a little bloated. The Audioquest made my sub more articulate to my ears and the bass was not bloated at all. At the price I paid for the AQ new ~65.00 it was well worth the money to me.

Your statements are ringing true for me, as the Sub-3 replaced my svs cable and as stated I noticed "flatter but better" Not the ideal review words but hopefully i got my meaning across.
Less seemed like more!

Thanks for your words.

Vlad.Grigorian

MADGSF wrote: »

I use an Audioquest Sub-X cable in my system, previously used a Monster Cable and SVS cable. To my ears the Monster cable was bloated and the bass sounded like one note. The SVS was not as one note as the Monster but was to me still a little bloated. The Audioquest made my sub more articulate to my ears and the bass was not bloated at all. At the price I paid for the AQ new ~65.00 it was well worth the money to me.

I am very interested in your experience. I've been using AudioQuest X-sub cables. Saw these Sub-3 cables and bought them (the 5 meters). They have not arrived yet. So, I am upgrading from the same cables . Would you mind letting me know what your experience was? Same as the others - leaner bass, but better defined, controlled? What about music vs movies? Did the amount of bass decrease significantly? My subs have plenty of juice. So if it is like 20% less that wouldnt matter in the least. But still, just wondering how significant the decrease was. Also, how would you describe the sound with the Sub-3's?

Vlad.Grigorian

DSkip wrote: »

More controlled bass sounds leaner, but it isn't. I read somewhere recently that properly set up, a 20 hz tone cannot be heard, but only felt. What you normally hear with a 20 hz tone is harmonic distortion that occurs at higher frequencies. When you are used to 'sloppy' bass, the move to quality bass can be quite a revelation. Give it a week or two to adjust before you say the bass is actually leaner, and not just cleaner.

Thank you for the reply. Another question. I am getting conflicting information about the Sub-3 being directional and whether or not DBS should be on the sub side or the AVR side. Can you clarify , please? Much obliged.

tonyb

Money would have got you better results by upgrading some IC's. Just my .02

EndersShadow

tonyb wrote: »

Money would have got you better results by upgrading some IC's. Just my .02

He's got decent MIT interconnects for his setup tony.... and decent MIT speaker wire too....

tonyb

EndersShadow wrote: »

tonyb wrote: »

Money would have got you better results by upgrading some IC's. Just my .02

He's got decent MIT interconnects for his setup tony.... and decent MIT speaker wire too....

Then maybe move up the MIT ladder ?

Vlad.Grigorian

Thanks, Enders and Tony. Tony, what is the next step up from MIT? Which IC/wire vendor? I think the most worthwhile upgrade is upgrading from Polks (forgive my herecy!). I know which speakers I want to upgrade my LSiM705s to, but I have space constraints/

tonyb

I meant move up the MIT line....for instance if your using the AVT's....move up to the shotgun series.

What speaks are you looking at anyway ? Curious minds want to know.

EndersShadow

Tony, depends on the day lol...

Planars of some sort lol...

Problem is his setup is very compromised with regards to pulling speakers out from the wall.

But he knows it and knows his stuff. I'm sure he will figure it out.