Good Reliable 25’ – 30’ Sub Cable?

[Barney1]

Just purchased the VTF-3 MK2 and cannot wait til it arrives! Based on Dr. Hsu sub placement, I will need a 25’ to 30’ long sub cable. Can somebody tell me who makes a good reliable sub cable at those lengths? I would hate to skimp on the cable for this sub.
I purchased a 25’ from Monster, but I got to think that there are others out there that are as good if not better.

[tdekany]

I use the cable that the Dr sells here.

[cschang]

I bought all my interconnects from www.bluejeanscable.com.

Take that Monster cable back.....unless it was an incredible sale, it was overpriced.

[finchna]

Originally Posted by Barney1

Just purchased the VTF-3 MK2 and cannot wait til it arrives! Based on Dr. Hsu sub placement, I will need a 25’ to 30’ long sub cable.

You can use 2 of the HSU cables and connect them with a female-female RCA adapter (from Radio Shack or www.trianglecables.com, etc.).

[jigesh]

Or if you are into DIY, use Belden 89259, Cardas GRMO male RCA connectors, and this recipe: http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/i1.htm

[Retread]

Originally Posted by Barney1

Can somebody tell me who makes a good reliable sub cable at those lengths? I would hate to skimp on the cable for this sub

Impedance, resistance, frequency response, and most of the other parameters relevant to transmission media are irrelevant to a sub cable. The only parameter that matters is shielding.

I made my own sub cable using a 50' roll of Radio Shack shielded twisted pair "audio cable" and two RCA plugs. Connected one wire on both ends to the RCA center, the other wire to the RCA outer on both ends, and the shield to the RCA outer on one end. Never had any trouble out of it going on a year now.

There's a lot of "lilly guilding" out there on cables.

[sputnikv8]

I just used some plain ole coax. That made it nice cuz I ran it up the wall, thru attic, down the wall to a terminating plate. A couple of ratshack "type F" connectors convert the coax to rca and it comes out right by my sub.

Very clean and extremely cheap. Performance difference was difficult to determine since the only comparison was having the sub corner loaded up front near the fireplace. I like the sub much better having it right behind me now.

[Retread]

Originally Posted by sputnikv8

Performance difference was difficult to determine since the only comparison was having the sub corner loaded up front near the fireplace.

The only issue in a sub cable is whether you have hum or not. If you don't have hum, you have a good sub cable. If you have hum, you have a bad sub cable. There is no other "performance difference."

[tedmjr2]

I did the same as Sputnikv8, using RG-6 coax. My "nearfield" VTF-3 MkII sounds & feels great (low frequencies easily vibrate the couch even with the volume low)!

[Barney1]

Originally Posted by Retread

The only issue in a sub cable is whether you have hum or not. If you don't have hum, you have a good sub cable. If you have hum, you have a bad sub cable. There is no other "performance difference."

Thanks to all for the advise on sub cables.
What is a good test to determine if you have “hum”? Do you just turn up the volume on the AV receiver without audio input and listen for the hum?

[DNelms]

Originally Posted by cschang

I bought all my interconnects from www.bluejeanscable.com.

Take that Monster cable back.....unless it was an incredible sale, it was overpriced.

I agree with Curtis, get rid of the monster. I just posted in the which cable thread that I am currently using the Audioquest cable. I am not sure of which model it is (not the sub-1, but I think it is the Sidewinder. Anyway, it is the red one). I changed over from using monster's top of the line sub cable to the AudioQuest and I can really tell the difference.

I bought the cable at Magnolia Audio here in So. Calif. They are also some in Best Buy stores. The price of a two meter cable is $60. I think I payed $150 for the monster a few years ago.

[Retread]

Originally Posted by Barney1

Thanks to all for the advise on sub cables.
What is a good test to determine if you have “hum”? Do you just turn up the volume on the AV receiver without audio input and listen for the hum?

What you are look for is the contribution of the cable to hum, not the contribution of the receiver.

Start with the cable to the sub unplugged, turn the sub's volume all the way up, and listen for hum. That will tell you the sub's base hum/noise level.

TURN THE SUB VOLUME ALL THE WAY DOWN. Plug in the cable with the receiver volume all the way down and listen for hum. If you have major hum, you probably have a ground loop problem, although I had an incident in which the ground inside the sub had broken, resulting in a major hum as soon as I plugged in the cable.

Turn up the sub's volume with the receiver still down. If you hear significant additional hum, its probably cable contribution.

[Retread]

Originally Posted by DNelms

I changed over from using monster's top of the line sub cable to the AudioQuest and I can really tell the difference.

I would appreciate it if you could post the mechanism by which a difference in sub cable could result in a sonic difference detectable by ear.

[Barney1]

Originally Posted by Retread

What you are look for is the contribution of the cable to hum, not the contribution of the receiver.

Start with the cable to the sub unplugged, turn the sub's volume all the way up, and listen for hum. That will tell you the sub's base hum/noise level.

TURN THE SUB VOLUME ALL THE WAY DOWN. Plug in the cable with the receiver volume all the way down and listen for hum. If you have major hum, you probably have a ground loop problem, although I had an incident in which the ground inside the sub had broken, resulting in a major hum as soon as I plugged in the cable.

Turn up the sub's volume with the receiver still down. If you hear significant additional hum, its probably cable contribution.

I will give that a try... thanks again!

[Barney1]

Originally Posted by Retread

What you are look for is the contribution of the cable to hum, not the contribution of the receiver.

Start with the cable to the sub unplugged, turn the sub's volume all the way up, and listen for hum. That will tell you the sub's base hum/noise level.

TURN THE SUB VOLUME ALL THE WAY DOWN. Plug in the cable with the receiver volume all the way down and listen for hum. If you have major hum, you probably have a ground loop problem, although I had an incident in which the ground inside the sub had broken, resulting in a major hum as soon as I plugged in the cable.

Turn up the sub's volume with the receiver still down. If you hear significant additional hum, its probably cable contribution.

Retread,
I have it hooked up to my old sub and with coax and everything works fine as far as the hum test. Cant wait till my VT3-MK2 shows up! One more question, what’s better gold or silver interconnects ends? I purchased gold ones from the Rate Shack and they seem fine, but I have some silver laying around as well.

[Retread]

Originally Posted by Barney1

Retread,
I have it hooked up to my old sub and with coax and everything works fine as far as the hum test. Cant wait till my VT3-MK2 shows up! One more question, what’s better gold or silver interconnects ends? I purchased gold ones from the Rate Shack and they seem fine, but I have some silver laying around as well.

Gold has lower resistivity than silver, which is lower than copper. Also, gold doesn't corrode or tarnish. However, for a sub cable, resistivity isn't of much importance. The resistance of the sub's input is orders of magnitude larger than the cable's resistance. There's very little current flowing in the circuit. The important thing is to have a firm connection, which is why the spring-type is good, but not essential.

At radio frequencies, where surface effect is dominant, it's important to have silver or gold plating.

[nowandthen]

Not to be a jerk, but silver has the lowest resistivity (1.6), then copper (1.7), then gold (2.2). Gold is used on contacts primarilly because it resists corrosion/oxidation. Copper oxidizes easily, thus some type of plating is required to keep the contacts from oxidizing.

Personally, I can't tell the difference between gold contacts and silver (or whatever that silver looking coating is). I'll bet a dollar to a donut no one else can hear a difference either. I say buy a decent quality connector but don't be concerned about whether it is gold or some other plating, unless you like spending more money.

[Retread]

Originally Posted by nowandthen

Not to be a jerk, but silver has the lowest resistivity (1.6), then copper (1.7), then gold (2.2). Gold is used on contacts primarilly because it resists corrosion/oxidation. Copper oxidizes easily, thus some type of plating is required to keep the contacts from oxidizing.

Personally, I can't tell the difference between gold contacts and silver (or whatever that silver looking coating is). I'll bet a dollar to a donut no one else can hear a difference either. I say buy a decent quality connector but don't be concerned about whether it is gold or some other plating, unless you like spending more money.

Brain cramp.

Regardless of the particular conductor used, the connection will contribute a negligible amount of resistance to the circuit, assuming the connection is tight and the material making the contact isn't corroded. Gold doesn't corrode, so gold plating reduces the likelihood of corrosion.