I bought a subwoofer over the weekend. In the process, I’m talking to the Uniformed Best Buy Employee, who’s job is to get as much money from me as possible.
I ask the guy which is better - run the ‘subwoofer out’ from my receiver into the corresponding input on the sub, or run speaker wire from the receiver to the sub, and from the sub to the speakers?
He replies the RCA connector, because of the timing. See, bass travels slower than the rest of the music, so if you just use the speakers, then the timing is off.
What? You mean to tell me that the signal doesn’t travel at the same speed? Sounds like bovine feces to me.
What’s the straight dope? Is there any actual advantage to using one method over the other?
The main difference between using the speaker connection to the subwoofer and the subwoofer cable to the subwoofer is the crossover configuration.
If you hook up the subwoofer with the speaker cables, full-range sound is delivered to the subwoofer. The bass and highs must be separated by a crossover in the sub, then redirected to their final destinations. Audio hobbyists generally frown on introducting extra signal processing into a signal path, especially the speaker-level processing required in this case, which is especially difficult/expensive to get right.
If you hook up the subwoofer with the line-level signal (the RCA cable), your receiver’s crossover will separate the bass and the highs, and send them to the appropriate destinations. When listening to multichannel source, like Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS, no processing is even needed, as the bass is included in a separate track.
Which version is better really depends on your equipment and your desire to tweak things. Few receivers allow adjustment of the crossover point (it’s usually 80Hz, which is where the Dolby Digital system puts it), but many subwoofers do, so using the speaker connection may give you an extra setting to tweak. On the other hand, using the line-level connection opens up an additional tweak on the receiver - small or large main speakers, sending bass to the subwoofer only or to all front speakers, respectively.
Unfortunately, there is a recent trend of pushing super-expensive audio interconnects even at lowbrow stores like Best Buy. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Best Buy salesperson is merely hoping to sell you an overpriced RCA cable to hook up your subwoofer. I wouldn’t go for such a pitch - the cheapest cables of this kind that you can find at Wal-Mart, Target, et. al. should be fine, especially for a subwoofer. Even Radio Shack’s interconnects are edging into pricey territory these days, but they’re still cheaper than that Monster Cable nonsense.
Oh, and I agree - the bit about bass signals/sounds travelling more slowly is ridiculous.
Oh yeah, I said “standard RCA-type cable?” and he said “Oh no. You need a bass cable” :rolleyes:
I did end up buying a $15 cable cause I’m insane (I figure the extra shielding is good, I’ve got wires and wires back there…), but not the $40 monstrosity he wanted to sell me. The freakin’ cable was half the price of the subwoofer!
The other thing is - the sub has a 10 inch speaker. My front speakers also have 10s in them, but the bass is much (much) sharper and cleaner with the sub. Is that from the extra amp dedicated to the bottom end, or is it inherent in the subwoofer design somehow?
I bet it’s a bit of both (from your second post). You have more power going to the sub, the sub is probably better optimized to handle lower frequencies, AND the sub isn’t trying to handle the higher bass tones that your fronts are.
The different speed of travel sounds like garbage to me too. Even if it WAS true, that’s not what would alter the sound. Your problem would be that the signal would get to the sub a fraction of a second before getting to the fronts, since the signal travells past the sub to get to the fronts. The relative speeds wouldn’t matter.
Anyways, in the case of a $80 powered subwoofer, any such issues are irrelevant, they would be very minor tweaks, likely inaudible on that equipment. Hook it up any way you want, with any cable you want, just make sure it’s big enough to handle the current.
$15 for a long RCA cable isn’t so bad. If it’s sturdily made, it should last practically forever. You probably could have spent a little less, but it’s not a rip-off either.
As a guess, it’s a little of both. The subwoofer driver and enclosure are both optimised for the lowest couple of octaves, which makes a big difference. And adding power with that extra amp certainly doesn’t hurt.
And speaker placement can make a huge difference, especially with bass. Chances are, your sub isn’t in the same spot as your main speakers - you may have it placed better than your main speaker woofers.
if you can hear the “timing” difference…which is a fraction of a fraction of a second, then yes he is right…given you are also standing the exact same distance between all of your speakers, the speaker cables are the exact same length, etc, etc. I seriously doubt any human being can hear the timing difference.
It all depends too, on how you are planning on running the system.
The sub will overpower the front speakers if you have a high power amp and continue to run the door/dash and rear speakers off the reciever.
The best sound I ever had was in my old Accord. I used an 800 watt, 4 channel amp, and bridged two of the channels to power the a single 12" in a bandpass box, and the remaining two channels to power a pair of the 2 way 6 1/2 door speakers. The internal crossover in the amp was adjustable, allowing me to fine tune the range that the sub recieved (the reciever had no interal crossover… many recievers are like this, so that you can use the sub to power a full range. The better recievers have dual RCA outputs allowing you to retain the fade function.)
I used regular WalMart RCA cables (for VCRs, stereos, etc) and had no problems except for some interferance from the alternator. Keep in mind that their job IS to sell you the most expensive product possible, and many will have a audiophile snob attitude about it. You will likely not hear a noticable difference.
Sounds like he forgot to tell you to make sure you plug the “bass” cable into the receiver first and then plug the other end into the sub. If you plug it into the sub first, the bass will go in the wrong direction and will destroy the receiver.
I’ll charitably assume you had a valid point here, and that I somehow missed it. With that in mind, I ask that you try again. The way it’s written makes you look, um, mistaken. I’m typing with clenched teeth, here, struggling to be diplomatic.
He’s kidding, AskNott. It’s a bit of sarcasm, a wacky piece of advice that is as grounded in reality as the other nuggets of wisdom delivered by Uniformed Best Buy Personnel.
Using the receiver’s sub out is the way to go, for the reasons described above. An added plus - if the receiver’s set up to not send bass to the main speakers when the sub out is being used, the amplifier and speakers are relieved of the task of handling bass. The result is more power for the rest of your music/soundtrack and a cooler-running amp.
The timing issue isn’t entirely hooey - higher-end subs have a phase control to adjust the timing of when the bass notes are made relative to the rest of the sound. If the phasing is off, the bass can become less distinct and “muddied.”
you dont want to use crossover in the sub simply because it is of SHIT quality. why is it shit ? because its not even supposed to be there, they just throw it in as a bonus feature to impress those who don’t realize that its useless.
so if your receiver has bass management features ( meaning it can redirect bass from speakers to sub ) you should connect both speakers and sub to the receiver. and NOT connect speakers to the sub.
a more in-depth explanation if you want it : the crossover in sub is a passive one, or a high-level one, or a speaker-level one. the one in receiver is an active one, or a signal-levle or a line-level one. an active crossover is about 100 times cheaper to build right. and passive one is often IMPOSSIBLE to build to perform to same standard as even a very cheap active. so go with the active ( one inside receiver ).
an even better crossover type is a digital crossover. it is STILL a niche market though, some audiophiles are building systems based on them which will kick the shit out of anything you can ever dream of seeing in a store.
I’ll charitably assume you had a valid point here, and that I somehow missed it. With that in mind, I ask that you try again. The way it’s written makes you look, um, mistaken. I’m typing with clenched teeth, here, struggling to be diplomatic.