35' sub cable?

[Johnd]

Does anyone know where to get a good to high quality 35'-40' subwoofer cable? Impact Acoustics and Monster don't make them that long, and I am not so impressed with Blue Jeans Cable. Any suggestions? Thanks.

 

[JohnA]

You could always make your own if you don't find one long enough, use some RG6 and some RCA compression connectors. Or, just use a standard Composite video cable.

 

[gmoneyreece]

I have an IXOS 9 meter sub cable (to my right subwoofer) and a 5m to my left subwoofer and am pretty pleased with them. $10 here...

http://www.accessories4less.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?item=IXOSXFK01900

i paid about 3X that at my local home theater shop.

 

[jaxvon]

I'm surprised you're not satisfied with Blue Jeans. What was the issue you had with their cables?

Ram Electronics makes a 1694A based cable with Canare terminations that sells for $34.99.

http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/sub_cables.html

 

[mtrycrafts]

Does anyone know where to get a good to high quality 35'-40' subwoofer cable? Impact Acoustics and Monster don't make them that long, and I am not so impressed with Blue Jeans Cable. Any suggestions? Thanks.

As been suggested, or get a cable TV cable from Radio Shack, they come in 50ft length and two F connector converters to RCA.

 

[jonnythan]

http://www.cablesforless.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2719

http://www.cablesforless.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2226

Can't beat $10 if you ask me, but they'll let you spend $24 if you really want to.

 

[Johnd]

Thanks to all for your speedy responses. Jaxvon: I have no personal experience w/ BlueJeans...I guess I was just unimpressed with their site (I think they look comparable to Monster). But perhaps I'm wrong, and will give them a second look. Thanks again to all.

 

[zumbo]

For a run that long, I wouldn't settle for anything less than BJC Canare LV-77S. And, any BJC is far superior to Monster. Also, their site is very easy to use. You can find the exact cable you need in the exact length without any BS.

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/subwoofer/subwooferprices.htm

 

[mtrycrafts]

For a run that long, I wouldn't settle for anything less than BJC Canare LV-77S. And, any BJC is far superior to Monster. Also, their site is very easy to use. You can find the exact cable you need in the exact length without any BS.

http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/subwoofer/subwooferprices.htm

Why do you think a 35ft interconnect for low frequencies create issues and needs better interconnects?

 

[zumbo]

Why do you think a 35ft interconnect for low frequencies create issues and needs better interconnects?

I use it, I like it, and I believe the test results from BJC.

Canare LV-77S is a flexible, but thick coax with a stranded copper center conductor and two bare copper braid shields, one right on top of the other. This shielding provides an extremely conductive path to ground--just 1.8 ohms per thousand feet, lower than any other coax of comparable size. We put this cable up against a whole slate of other coaxes in a side-by-side hum rejection test, and it performed best of all. It is thick--.303 inch in diameter--but is more flexible than other comparably-sized coaxes, and therefore easy to route around obstacles if you're doing in-wall or in-conduit cabling.

 

[jonnythan]

I use it, I like it, and I believe the test results from BJC.

Canare LV-77S is a flexible, but thick coax with a stranded copper center conductor and two bare copper braid shields, one right on top of the other. This shielding provides an extremely conductive path to ground--just 1.8 ohms per thousand feet, lower than any other coax of comparable size. We put this cable up against a whole slate of other coaxes in a side-by-side hum rejection test, and it performed best of all. It is thick--.303 inch in diameter--but is more flexible than other comparably-sized coaxes, and therefore easy to route around obstacles if you're doing in-wall or in-conduit cabling.

Wow.

Their cable provides .063 ohms over the 35-foot length, when the connectors provide 75.

I guess *my* subwoofer cable, which is probably more like .09 ohms over its 35 foot length is going to sound worse.

After all, 75.09 > 75.063!!

 

[zumbo]

Wow.

Their cable provides .063 ohms over the 35-foot length, when the connectors provide 75.

I guess *my* subwoofer cable, which is probably more like .09 ohms over its 35 foot length is going to sound worse.

After all, 75.09 > 75.063!!

I don't quiet understand what you are trying to say, but none of the cables are going to "sound" any better than the others. It's all in what you want.

I have an expensive car. I use premium gas.

I have expensive gear. I use premium cables.

I do have a mixed selection, but I don't have any of these you recommended.
http://www.cablesforless.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2226

The Canare you listed look good, but BJC has 35' of Belden 1505F for $32. For some reason, they don't use 1505A for a sub cable. Must be that hum thingy.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Wow.

Their cable provides .063 ohms over the 35-foot length, when the connectors provide 75.

I guess *my* subwoofer cable, which is probably more like .09 ohms over its 35 foot length is going to sound worse.

After all, 75.09 > 75.063!!

I think you are mixing DC resistance with RF cable impedance values.

But, we are talking low frequency audio and interconnects without shielding does the trick. Not hard to get cables away from power cables.

 

[Johnd]

interference?

Thanks again for the input guys. It seems like the Canare or Belden will be fine. My final issue is this...I understand that I can avoid power cord interference by simply routing the sub cable away from all power cords. Do I risk any interference on an unshielded sub cable from rf signals? (I have a Pronto remote with RF extender.) As additional info, I am currently using a Monster ultra on a Paradigm servo15. Thanks