Yes Pete, I think that I can bring myself to come up with some comments. First, the Cables America response is entirely correct, but rather than "in place of" I would use "as", since the broadest definition(excluding the spaghetti)of a sub cable is simply a wire with an RCA plug on each end.
The Digitally Unique response is questionable in several respects. First he appears to believe that he can reveal some deeper truth that someone "Technically speaking" can't. He apparently considers himself a "true audiophile" and therefore knows that a cable has to have "subwoofer" on it to really let the sub sound right. He doesn't know however that the impedance rating of an interconnect cable, within very wide limits, is of no significance at audio frequencies. As he said, it may have to do with noise, but that's what a coaxial type cable is good at rejecting. Lastly, he would send you to the rip-off artists at Monster Cable, depriving his company of a possible sale because of his ignorance.
Both companies are selling the same-numbered Cables to Go item, but DU apparently has used much of the description from an entirely different
cable ,not noticing "twisted pair", "spiral-wound" and the fact that it's two cables instead of one. Despite all this sloppiness, $5 is $5 and the fact that the company has hired a "true audiophile"(who hopefully will still attain salvation)shouldn't deprive it of a sale.
