subwoofer cable

Zock

Forgot to ask in my earlier post what sort of cable to use to connect the subwoofer to the receiver. Thanks.

F1nut

Using the LFE or Sub Out, you'll want to use a 75 ohm cable with RCA ends. While any 75 ohm cable will likely do the trick, I like the Analysis Plus Super Sub Oval. Audio Advisor has it and other dedicated subwoofer cables here, http://www.audioadvisor.com/products.asp?dept=28

John K.

Zock, welcome to Club Polk. A subwoofer is connected to the receiver with a coaxial cable that has an RCA plug on each end. It doesn't have to be labeled a "subwoofer cable", because there is no such specific variety of cable. As to price, in my view it isn't a question of being "cheap", but not wanting to be played for a sucker, regardless of the amount involved. For my $1100 subwoofer I've used this MonoPrice cable for about 5 years, which does this very simple job as well as it can be done.

F1nut

So Johnny, tell us again exactly what high end cables you have tried. Oh wait that's right, none. :rolleyes:

Tour2ma

Nothing says welcome to Club Polk like a Senior member dropping trou in your first thread... pathetic...

Keiko wrote: »

1100.00 sub with an .11c cable. :rolleyes: Marvelous!

Maybe, Keiko, but is it any more ridiculous than recommending a $200 cable for a $200 sub?

Zock,
Welcome to the Club... sorry you had to see such pettiness so early in your visit. Hopefully you won't find it too off-putting as this place can be very helpful (as I think you've learned in your Banana Plug thread).

I'm going to interpret your question a tad differently than F1, AKA "the senior member". Since you are going to put your Denon in control of the sub, the kind of cable you want for the sub is a single, RCA interconnect cable. Sub cables are not a helluva lot different from those you use to patch your DVD to your AVR... just a lot longer. And since it's longer it can, IMO, make sense to spend a little more for a higher quality cable with better shielding.

Wire and cable value are hot topics in any audio forum; this one is no different. The reasonable folk on either side will tell you what they think, that you should listen for yourself and leave you be. The unreasonable ones will tell you to listen for yourself and then tell you what an audio buffoon you are if you don't hear what they hear... or think they hear... or don't hear... etc.

I am indifferent to the wire debate, but I do believe that interconnects (IC's/ cables) can make a difference. That said I would not go crazy as your 202 is an entry level sub, especially if you're primary into HT as your Denon investment would suggest.

If you want to begin exploring the wire debate on the cheap, nab the cheapest, no-name cable in the length you need from PartsExpress or other reputable on-line dealer. Also nab a "better" cable of the same length; something along the lines of Keiko's, $25-ish, bluejeans' option, a well-respected IC builder 'round here. Then do your own shoot-out some afternoon with a variety of music and movies, taking notes on your impressions.

Have fun... and again welcome to the Club...

Syndil

+1 to what Tour2ma said. I also believe cables can make a difference, but only if they are faulty or otherwise deficient. That said, I use Monoprice cables almost exclusively. Yes, I have tried more expensive cables, but IMO they are just more expensive.

IMO there's lots of snake oil being sold as "audiophile" gear, but if you enjoy spending money on it, then who is to argue with that, regardless if the enjoyment comes from real or imagined differences? The flipside is that, if you can't perceive a difference, then no reason to pay for something someone else claims is an improvement.

F1nut

Tour2ma wrote: »

Nothing says welcome to Club Polk like a Senior member dropping trou in your first thread... pathetic...



I'm going to interpret your question a tad differently than F1, AKA "the senior member". Since you are going to put your Denon in control of the sub, the kind of cable you want for the sub is a single, RCA interconnect cable. Sub cables are not a helluva lot different from those you use to patch your DVD to your AVR... just a lot longer. And since it's longer it can, IMO, make sense to spend a little more for a higher quality cable with better shielding.

Ummmm no, the LFE connection should be done with a 75 ohm coaxial cable (double braided outer shield), which is most definitely a lot different than an RCA interconnect (patch cord) cable.

As for dropping trou....unlike you, I won't get laughed at if I do.

Syndil

At audio frequencies, the impedance is utterly irrelevant unless you are running cables hundreds of yards in length. 75 ohm cables are usually sold as S/PDIF or AC-3 cables. At RF frequencies, impedance matters.

Any regular RCA interconnect will work just fine for a subwoofer.

tonyb

Either one will work, personally I like the 75 ohm variety. You can talk all you want about it not making a difference, but from my experience it has. Tighter bass with the 75 ohm version. Don't know why and frankly don't care. Maybe it has to do with impendence matching system wide rather than one piece. All I know is what my ears tell me.

justlord

F1nut wrote: »

Using the LFE or Sub Out, you'll want to use a 75 ohm cable with RCA ends. While any 75 ohm cable will likely do the trick, I like the Analysis Plus Super Sub Oval. Audio Advisor has it and other dedicated subwoofer cables here, http://www.audioadvisor.com/products.asp?dept=28

Omigosh. Those cables look better than the ones I've at the local Best Buy for much less than their cheapest cables. I do not want to distract from the topic, so only one response is needed. Will those 75 Ohm cables work for connecting pre-outs to powered-amps?

justlord

justlord wrote: »

Omigosh. Those cables look better than the ones I've at the local Best Buy for much less than their cheapest cables. I do not want to distract from the topic, so only one response is needed. Will those 75 Ohm cables work for connecting pre-outs to powered-amps?

Oops. Replied to the wrong post, but would still like to know the opinions on the 75 Ohm cables, because I found some from www.monoprice.com for dirt cheap, and everyone seems to swear by them.

tonyb

They will work fine, cables are like ice cream shops, different flavor for everyone.

Glowrdr

I would consider Monoprice a "standard" in cables. They are a hell of a lot better than the old school red/white/blue ones that are as thin as a piece of yarn. They do what they do, and they don't claim otherwise. For less than $5, they will get sound from point A to point B, with some accuracy (decent wire, shielding, and build quality).

You certainly can spend as much as you want on cables. Heck - you can buy cables that can run you 10k+. Is there a difference? I have no doubt there is. At what point are your returns deminished? I'd say someplace around the $50-100 mark? Not saying you can't get better performance - just saying once you have a nice pair of cables, anything after that is probably more fine tuning than anything else.

Not getting into a cable debate - just saying if you have a $50 BJC interconnect, is a $500 MIT interconnect 10x better? That's debatable. You just have to place a personal value on whatever gains you will be happy with for the price.

Syndil

This quote is from Pear Cable--a company which I regard as a snake oil company--their cheapest cables selling for $1,200 for a half-meter pair. Yes, $1,200. I did put the comma in the right place.

However, if the wavelength of the signal is large relative to the length of the cable, then reflections are not an issue. This is the case in the audio frequency band. This is why there is no impedance standard for analog audio connections or equipment. Even if one wanted to match the impedance, it would be extremely difficult because the characteristic impedance is changing with frequency in the audio band. Reflections are simply not an issue with analog audio.

But, whatever. I can't argue someone else's perceptions, so I won't attempt to.

justlord, you can't go wrong with Monoprice cables IMO.

F1nut

Syndil wrote: »

At audio frequencies, the impedance is utterly irrelevant unless you are running cables hundreds of yards in length. 75 ohm cables are usually sold as S/PDIF or AC-3 cables. At RF frequencies, impedance matters.

Any regular RCA interconnect will work just fine for a subwoofer.

Where did anyone say that the impedance was key? Tony was taking a guess and all I said was that a 75 ohm (as a means of identification) coaxial cable should be used as it seems to be the preferred cable for subwoofer use by most users and by most of the companies that sell them.

Out of curiosity, what cables other than Monoprice have you tried in your system in order for you to proclaim all over this forum your opinions on all things snake oil?

I've heard of Pear Cable, but I have never heard their cables and therefore cannot comment as to whether they are snake oil or not. I also know that you've never heard them, so how can you have any opinion on them other than stating they are out of your price range? Is it simply a matter that anything out of your price range is snake oil because that's how you come off.

F1nut

justlord wrote: »

Will those 75 Ohm cables work for connecting pre-outs to powered-amps?

A regular RCA interconnect cable is what you're looking for.

Syndil

tour2ma wrote:

Since you are going to put your Denon in control of the sub, the kind of cable you want for the sub is a single, RCA interconnect cable.

F1nut wrote: »

Ummmm no, the LFE connection should be done with a 75 ohm coaxial cable (double braided outer shield), which is most definitely a lot different than an RCA interconnect (patch cord) cable.

...

justlord wrote:

Will those 75 Ohm cables work for connecting pre-outs to powered-amps?

F1nut wrote:

A regular RCA interconnect cable is what you're looking for.

See the hilarity here? Let me spell it out. An LFE output to powered-subwoofer connection IS a pre-out to a powered amp connection.

As for the rest, I will not be baited. We've all heard that argument before and we all know where it leads. Let's just say I'm an objectivist, you're a subjectivist, and call it a day.

And justlord, a 75 ohm cable will work fine for a pre-amp to amp connection. My point was that it doesn't need to be a 75 ohm cable. As I said, impedance is irrelevant. So if you like Monoprice's 75 ohm cables better than their standard interconnects, go for it.

Edit: Actually even their "premium" audio interconnects are made with RG59U cable, which is... *drumroll*... 75 ohm coaxial.

Tour2ma

Well at least the discussion centers more on the OP's question now. It's amazing what happens when posts are read and thought about before answering... and if someone here would have thought a little more, he might have seen that the basic choice is between a line-level, RCA cable connection and a speaker-level connection.

Syndil wrote: »

See the hilarity here? Let me spell it out. An LFE output to powered-subwoofer connection IS a pre-out to a powered amp connection.

I see it...

Syndil wrote: »

And justlord, a 75 ohm cable will work fine for a pre-amp to amp connection. My point was that it doesn't need to be a 75 ohm cable.

When I think "75-ohm application", I think "very high frequency signals", e.g., video and digital. Full range, analog audio not so much... Deep bass/ LFE even less.

From all I've ever read 75-ohm design is more about better signal containment to reduce losses (often called "leakage") than it is about shielding from external interferences. And leakage increases with frequency. That said improved shielding is a benefit of the 75-ohm design.

IMO the need for 75-ohm IC's for short, well-managed, analog audio connections, e.g., sources to Pre's, Pre's to amps, etc. is non-existent. Longer connections, as subs tend to require, might be problematic, but only in very "noisy", high EMF environments.

tonyb wrote: »

All I know is what my ears tell me.

Keiko wrote: »

Not all cables are created the same either. Yeah, any RCA cable will work. Do they work and sound the same? Not in my opinion.

Agree and agree... I see all but one here urging the OP to experiment for himself. We are discussing relative benefits of two designs (with a nod to build quality) rather than how much the OP should spend. I think we also all agree that the gear at either end of the cable is a factor and that the use (HT vs. music) is also a factor.

F1nut wrote: »

As for dropping trou....unlike you, I won't get laughed at if I do.

Oh snap!!! I'd forgotten how little a Middle School level comeback stung...

Jesse, in your case it's not a matter of "if", but of "How often"... A simple, User Name post search will back me up. I'd be shocked if your average frequency is less than once per page of search results... especially since closed threads, like this classic, are included in the results.

tonyb

You guys crack me up.

Bruce- Haven't you put up the Christmas tree yet ? Maybe slush down some Jack Daniels cup of cheer ? I think the OP was looking for a simpler answer without the scientific benefits of cable design. That said, I have to excuse myself, the coffee mug is running short of Baileys.

F1nut

Syndil wrote:

See the hilarity here? Let me spell it out. An LFE output to powered-subwoofer connection IS a pre-out to a powered amp connection.

No kidding. :rolleyes: Let me say it again, the preferred cable for a sub connection is a 75 ohm coaxial cable. Hell, even Bruuuuuce finally got that in a basic contradiction to his original suggestion. Hello!

F1nut

Tour2ma wrote:

Jesse, in your case it's not a matter of "if", but of "How often"... A simple, User Name post search will back me up. I'd be shocked if your average frequency is less than once per page of search results... especially since closed threads, like this classic, are included in the results.

That's pretty funny coming from the guy that doesn't get invited back.

Tour2ma

tonyb wrote: »

You guys crack me up.

That's what we're here for...

F1nut wrote: »

No kidding. :rolleyes: Let me say it again, the preferred cable for a sub connection is a 75 ohm coaxial cable. Hell, even Bruuuuuce finally got that in a basic contradiction to his original suggestion. Hello!

dictionary.com wrote:

con?tra?dic?tion   /ˌkɒntrəˈdɪkʃən/ Show Spelled[kon-truh-dik-shuhn] Show IPA
noun
1. the act of contradicting; gainsaying or opposition.
2. assertion of the contrary or opposite; denial.
3. a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.
4. direct opposition between things compared; inconsistency.
5. a contradictory act, fact, etc.

Sorry, don't see where any two things I have posted here meet any part of this.

F1nut wrote: »

That's pretty funny coming from the guy that doesn't get invited back.

... to???

You know, if you want to inflict hurt, it would better serve you if I had clue what you're talking about.