or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › newbie question: what subwoofer cables (and y splitters) to get for Klipsch Reference RW-12d?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

newbie question: what subwoofer cables (and y splitters) to get for Klipsch Reference RW-12d?

post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Which is worth it to get better or do i need to buy for its purpose?

Subwoofer Cables:
$5.13 - 15ft High-quality Coaxial Audio/Video RCA CL2 Rated Cable - RG6/U 75ohm (for S/PDIF, Digital Coax, Subwoofer, and Composite Video)
$9.99 - Mediabridge 15 feet Ultra Series - Dual Shielded Subwoofer Cable - RCA to RCA Gold Plated Pro Grade Connectors
$30.25 - BJC LC-1 Subwoofer Cable

Y Splitter Cables: because I want to use both subwoofer inputs.
$2.67 - 6inch RCA Female to 2-RCA Male Digital Coaxial Splitter Adapter
$9.99 - Mediabridge Ultra Series - CA Y Adapter - 1-Female to 2-Male for Digital Audio or Subwoofer
post #2 of 38
The cheapest options will work just fine.

Best Regards
KvE
post #3 of 38
Quote:
The cheapest options will work just fine.
+1. Monoprice's cables are a good value.
post #4 of 38
Thread Starter 
OK thanks!

But I've read online not to skimp on subwoofer cables. what do you think about spending more money on cables?

Just want to get second/third opinions on this if they are going to affect the performance.
Edited by Stealth3si - 10/11/12 at 8:54pm
post #5 of 38
The Monoprice ones will be fine.

If you want a higher quality cable, get one custom made from Blue Jeans Cable. Their cables are very good build quality, but don't expect any audible improvements over Monoprice.
post #6 of 38
Quote:
But I've read online not to skimp on subwoofer cables.
Don't believe everything you read on-line! Oh, wait a minute... wink.gif
Quote:
what do you think about spending more money on cables?
Generally-speaking, I think it's unnecessary.

I have a Monoprice cable for my sub, Monoprice cables for my AVR-to-power amp connections, a Monoprice DVI-to-HDMI adapter for my PJ, and various Monoprice HDMI cables for components-to-AVR (or to -TV, in the family room) connectivity. I've had no problems with any of them. smile.gif
post #7 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth3si View Post

OK thanks!
But I've read online not to skimp on subwoofer cables.

None of the options you give look like skimping to me.
Quote:
what do you think about spending more money on cables?

More than what?
Quote:
Just want to get second/third opinions on this if they are going to affect the performance.

Performance has many dimensions. This cable will work, too:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/RCA-Male-to-M-sheilded-Gold-Patch-Cables-15-Foot-Audio-/300419900804



This is the worst built cable that I could find online. Surprisingly, its not the cheapest. The cheapest cable that I could find looked to be little better made.

What don't I like about it?

(1) Cheap thin stamped metal connectors.
(2) Thin cable

I would expect that there would be no immediate sound quality difference between this cable and any that you mentioned or the best cable in the world.

The real differences that I expect would be related to durability. If you just put the cable into service and treat it right, it would still last longer than the equipment it is attached to.

If you plug and unplug this cheapie cable more than a few times, the cheap thin metal would loosen up and become intermittent. The thin wire might pull out of the connectors if you pull them out by tugging on the cable and don't use the finger grips.
post #8 of 38
I'm using a Monster subwoofer cable with a Monster Y adapter on my sub. Call me crazy for paying extra but I've always used Monster products and love them.

post #9 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth3si View Post

OK thanks!
But I've read online not to skimp on subwoofer cables. what do you think about spending more money on cables?
Just want to get second/third opinions on this if they are going to affect the performance.
In terms of getting the best sound possible you need not spend more than a dollar a foot for the cable, five bucks each for the connectors. You can spend a hundred times that, a thousand for that matter, and it won't work any better.
Quote:
Call me crazy for paying extra but I've always used Monster products and love them.
Love is blind I guess.
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2012/03/29/monster-cables-face-off-against-coat-hangers/
post #10 of 38
What kind of "problem" would you expect to have? No sound? I don't see why people need to buy the cheapest stuff out there.
post #11 of 38
Excuse my ignorance, but what is the "Y" connector for the sub for? Unless you are using 1 LFE pre-out to split into 2 subs, you only need the one connector correct?
thanks,
Todd
post #12 of 38
Some subs don't have a dedicated LFE input, just L+R line-level inputs. And although you can usually just connect to one or the other of those inputs, some folks like to connect to both using a Y-splitter.
post #13 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

In terms of getting the best sound possible you need not spend more than a dollar a foot for the cable, five bucks each for the connectors. You can spend a hundred times that, a thousand for that matter, and it won't work any better. Love is blind I guess.
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2012/03/29/monster-cables-face-off-against-coat-hangers/

Yes I've seen that link before and it never changed my mind about Monster products. biggrin.gif
post #14 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by cchunter View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

In terms of getting the best sound possible you need not spend more than a dollar a foot for the cable, five bucks each for the connectors. You can spend a hundred times that, a thousand for that matter, and it won't work any better. Love is blind I guess.
http://www.geeksaresexy.net/2012/03/29/monster-cables-face-off-against-coat-hangers/

Yes I've seen that link before and it never changed my mind about Monster products. biggrin.gif

Some might call that "Living in a logic-tight box". ;-)
post #15 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by cchunter View Post

Yes I've seen that link before and it never changed my mind about Monster products.
I've read Monsters ads full of psuedo-scientific gobbledy-gook crafted with the sole intent of separating suckers from their money, and they haven't changed my mind about their products, so that makes us even.
post #16 of 38
My system is connected with a mix of both Monster cables and cables from Monoprice. There is no difference. Actually the Monoprice cables look and feel better IMO.
post #17 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnyk View Post

None of the options you give look like skimping to me.
More than what?
Performance has many dimensions. This cable will work, too:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RCA-Male-to-M-sheilded-Gold-Patch-Cables-15-Foot-Audio-/300419900804

This is the worst built cable that I could find online. Surprisingly, its not the cheapest. The cheapest cable that I could find looked to be little better made.
What don't I like about it?
(1) Cheap thin stamped metal connectors.
(2) Thin cable
I would expect that there would be no immediate sound quality difference between this cable and any that you mentioned or the best cable in the world.
The real differences that I expect would be related to durability. If you just put the cable into service and treat it right, it would still last longer than the equipment it is attached to.
If you plug and unplug this cheapie cable more than a few times, the cheap thin metal would loosen up and become intermittent. The thin wire might pull out of the connectors if you pull them out by tugging on the cable and don't use the finger grips.

I don't know about using plain old RCA cables. I just replaced mine with digital coax and the sub is no longer boomy.
post #18 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by asere View Post

I don't know about using plain old RCA cables. I just replaced mine with digital coax and the sub is no longer boomy.
There is no intrinsic difference between 'plain old RCA' cables and digital coax. Some cables intended for video and/or digital have lower capacitance than those intended for analog audio, but not all by any means, and even if your new cable has lower capacitance than the old the only difference heard would be in the upper end of the frequency spectrum, not the lower end.
post #19 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

There is no intrinsic difference between 'plain old RCA' cables and digital coax. Some cables intended for video and/or digital have lower capacitance than those intended for analog audio, but not all by any means, and even if your new cable has lower capacitance than the old the only difference heard would be in the upper end of the frequency spectrum, not the lower end.

Well I don't know but in my case it was a major improvement.
post #20 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

There is no intrinsic difference between 'plain old RCA' cables and digital coax. Some cables intended for video and/or digital have lower capacitance than those intended for analog audio, but not all by any means, and even if your new cable has lower capacitance than the old the only difference heard would be in the upper end of the frequency spectrum, not the lower end.
Dr Hsu stated that there should be no difference also Yoda.
post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by asere View Post

Well I don't know but in my case it was a major improvement.
There may be something wrong with your rca cable.
post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by eljaycanuck View Post

Some subs don't have a dedicated LFE input, just L+R line-level inputs. And although you can usually just connect to one or the other of those inputs, some folks like to connect to both using a Y-splitter.
Some say that you get a stronger signal and the auto on feature will kick on at a lower volume. Dont know if its true. Perhaps Yoda can shed some light on that theory. I love typing "Yoda". lol
post #23 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

There may be something wrong with your rca cable.

Well my RCA cable was 25 ft long. I don't know if that was an issue being such a thin cable.
post #24 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bond 007 View Post

Some say that you get a stronger signal and the auto on feature will kick on at a lower volume. Dont know if its true. Perhaps Yoda can shed some light on that theory. I love typing "Yoda". lol
Those subs sum the L/R input, amounting to have a Y connector on the inside of the sub, while most sources sum the L/R channels below 80Hz, amounting to having a virtual Y connector in the CD player or other source. Most discrete L/R recordings below 80Hz date back to the pre-subwoofer era, and most of them sound pretty bad, as they don't resemble how low frequencies sound live.
post #25 of 38
I would be willing to bet that the difference in sound you're getting between different cables is less a function of the cable, and more of a function in the audio hardware inputs and how they are processed by the electronics. In the case of anything digital, you are crazy for spending extra money on a high end HDMI, etc cable unless you are specifically having problems with interference, or some other strange event. In that case you're using a better cable as a band aid, not solving the actual problem.

I don't really understand why people are perfectly happy downloading lossless media through their "pathetic little Ethernet cables", then think they need a $1,000 cable for their audio system to play it.
post #26 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by dhammans View Post

In the case of anything digital, you are crazy for spending extra money on a high end HDMI, etc cable unless you are specifically having problems with interference.
Reality check: Digital transmission was developed because it's immune to interference, be it over an HDMI cable ten feet long or a few miles of TV cable. Take notice that when the cable companies had to provide digital signals they didn't replace their cable, nor did you have to replace the cable in your home.
post #27 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Fitzmaurice View Post

Those subs sum the L/R input, amounting to have a Y connector on the inside of the sub, while most sources sum the L/R channels below 80Hz, amounting to having a virtual Y connector in the CD player or other source. Most discrete L/R recordings below 80Hz date back to the pre-subwoofer era, and most of them sound pretty bad, as they don't resemble how low frequencies sound live.
So..with the RW12 is there any advantage/disadvantage to using a y connector at the back of the sub with an lfe capable receiver. I would like to get the auto on to come on at a lower volume but not at the sacrifice of any audio quality.
post #28 of 38
I am interested in the Y cable subject. I am using a y connector to my sub but to hear the difference it might make over a single connector can't you just try it both ways?
Does it matter if it's a single cable (cheap or not) plugged into the L or R connector?
post #29 of 38
If you use a Y-connector to the sub it will make no difference in sound quality. It will provide an increase in the db level but not by that much. It will be enough to turn the sub on when in the auto mode when listening at low volume.
post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by capricorn kid View Post

It will provide an increase in the db level but not by that much..
It won't provide any increase in level. The output of the receiver is a voltage source; if you split that voltage to both sub inputs that voltage is not increased as it's a parallel connection. The only reason to use a Y connector is with sources that don't have the L/R content below 80Hz summed, which pretty much means vinyl of late 60s/early 70s vintage.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Subwoofers, Bass, and Transducers › newbie question: what subwoofer cables (and y splitters) to get for Klipsch Reference RW-12d?