|   Interconnects designed for subwoofers. Snake oil or not? | Jazzy
Jun 15, 2002 12:26 PM | | Am I missing something here? How hard should it be for any cable (cheap to the very best)to transfer a low pass signal? |
| re: Interconnects designed for subwoofers. Snake oil or not? | chronot4242
Jun 15, 2002 1:48 PM | | As long as it's shielded and fits your RCA jack well, it should work fine. |
| re: Interconnects designed for subwoofers. Snake oil or not? | FLZapped
Jun 15, 2002 1:52 PM | | My vote is in the snake oil category.
Your gut reaction is the right one.
-Bruce |
| It appears that we're all on the same page here | woodman
Jun 15, 2002 2:17 PM | | Jazzy:
You are correct sir - the passage of a VERY narrow bandwidth audio signal from a reciever or pre-pro to a subwoofer is about the least critical job that a piece of wire can be asked to do.
When someone posts to this thread that some subwoofer cables sound waaaaay better than others - ignore 'em. They are merely audio CONEs with nothing better to do than mislead others with their obsessive POVs. Snake oil? You betcha!
woodman |
| My vote is for Snake oil.... | MonstrousMike
Jun 15, 2002 3:06 PM | | The only problem I can fathom is the introduction of 60 Hz hum into the subwoofer cable from power lines. Obviously, the sub is perfectly designed to amplify such a signal, however there would have to be fairly perfect circumstances for a problem to arise.
Any properly shielded cable, which would include all coaxial cables like RG-59, video cables, analog audio cables, digital audio cables, whatever, would work just fine.
A coaxial cable would have to be very freakin' long to affect the audio band of a subwoofer signal (20Hz-120Hz).
Personally, I use 40 feet of RG-59 RF video cable with F-type to RCA adapters. Total cost, twenty bucks.
The only thing you're missing here is spending money for no reason. |
| My vote is for Snake oil.... | Jazzy
Jun 15, 2002 4:38 PM | | Thanks for the advise guys.I have a question about toslink cable I'll post seperately. Once again thanks. |
| NOT snake oil... | one50
Jun 15, 2002 6:46 PM | | I'm not on the same page as you guys...Jazzy don't listen to these guys tellin you cables don't make a diff. They do...Listen for yourself...If they don't, stick with the cheap stuff.
One50 |
| NOT snake oil... | mtrycrafts
Jun 15, 2002 9:40 PM | | b Jazzy don't listen to these guys tellin you cables don't make a diff.
Yes, of course. The maker is laughing all the way to the bank.
b ...Listen for yourself...
Now, that is not sao simple, is it. How do you control for bias? Or do you? Perhaps what you think you hear is really just imagined? |
| NOT snake oil... | one50
Jun 16, 2002 11:41 AM | | i Now, that is not sao simple, is it. How do you control for bias? Or do you? Perhaps what you think you hear is really just imagined?
Every choice we make is due to bias...So, no, I don't control bias...it's just a fact of life.
FYI everything we hear and see is imagied...the world around us is what we make it. If my brain imagins a better sounding cable...I'll buy it...The brain is a powerful thing.
One50 |
| I hope you're not a jury member at my trial...nt | MonstrousMike
Jun 16, 2002 1:07 PM | | |
| And I hope you're never my defense counsel. (nt) | pctower
Jun 18, 2002 4:03 AM | | NT |
| And I hope you're never my defense counsel. (nt) | MonstrousMike
Jun 18, 2002 6:56 AM | | I hope you're kidding. One50 stated that he can't control his biases. He can make an objective decision. That's the reason OJ is free today. If he was a jury member at my trial, that means he vote innocent if he likes me and guilty if he doesn't like me because he can't control his biases.
As for me being your defense counsel; why would you say something like that? I'd pick apart all of the arguements of the prosecution. And if the prosecution tried to shift the burden of proof on me, watch out.
Don't laugh, but I think I'd make a good trial lawyer.
Hey, I said don't laugh....Can't you control your biases? |
| And I hope you're never my defense counsel. (nt) | pctower
Jun 18, 2002 8:38 AM | | Actually, I do agree you'd make a great lawyer. I just couldn't resist the cheap shot. |
| Controlling for bias. | A
Jun 17, 2002 10:35 AM | | You might want to take a look at:
<a href="/crforum?14@@.ef875dd">A "Explanation of Double Blind Test" 3/30/02 2:46pm</a>
Additionally, if you can just imagine good sound and create it in your head, why bother with equipment at all? Obviously, fancy wires are not needed for that. But please take a look at the above link. |
| Carl Sagan would be proud. | pctower
Jun 18, 2002 4:06 AM | | b The only thing you're missing here is spending money for no reason.
Certainly a well-supported, unbiased claim. |
| Carl Sagan would be proud. | MonstrousMike
Jun 18, 2002 7:00 AM | | <<<< The only thing you're missing here is spending money for no reason. >>>>
No, it certainly was not a well-supported, unbiased claim. It is a well-founded, well-thought out, humble opinion. Do I need to add "IMHO" in every post I make? |
| Carl Sagan would be proud. | pctower
Jun 18, 2002 8:42 AM | | b Do I need to add "IMHO" in every post I make?
If this were an ordinary forum, I would say that would be a little overkill. But here, where the very future of the human race hangs in the balance, I believe it certainly pays to be careful. |
| IMHO? | Spiky
Jun 19, 2002 7:21 AM | | I am required to in order to avoid backlash. And the yeasayers are. Why not you?
IMHO
(o=observation) |
| |
