Are most new subs the same in 2018

[Auditor55]

The rest was very well said, but I have to disagree with this part. Sloppy bass just sucks no matter where it is. IME there are some good soundtracks out there with bass that is quite textured. Something a non linear sloppy sub would gloss over. Just like it would with music.

Many times, as you call sloppy sub has a lot to do with set up. An expensive sub could sloppy if you don't set it up right.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Many times, as you call sloppy sub has a lot to do with set up. An expensive sub could sloppy if you don't set it up right.

Absolutely true. Can’t disagree. My point though was based on what I feel Kurt’s point was in the use of a properly set up subwoofer of lesser linear behavior. IE: sloppy boomy bass. Iirc what he said.

 

[KEW]

Absolutely true. Can’t disagree. My point though was based on what I feel Kurt’s point was in the use of a properly set up subwoofer of lesser linear behavior. IE: sloppy boomy bass. Iirc what he said.

We are getting into awkward wording here.
A sub anechoically flat to the low-mid 20's will not sound "fast and tight" without further tuning. Most people use the sub crawl for the strongest bass which would not help. Audyssey or miniDSP could potentially resolve teh issue; however, IME, Audyssey alone was inadequate to fix the issue. I assume either the needed correction exceeded Audyssey's limits (it will only be so aggressive - seems like a limit of either 8 or 10dB) or that Audyssey took a null to be the bottom limit of a subwoofer and did not attempt correction below it (I assume this behavior is to protect ported subs from increases in signal below their port's tuning frequency, but Audyssey is a bit of a secret formula, so who knows)?
However, if "properly tuned" includes miniDSP, I suspect this issue can be corrected.

 

[shadyJ]

if you are wanting a sub to do dual duty for music and HT and decide to get a ported sub, look for the ability to tune the sub with plugs for the ports. These generally do not perform quite so well in the sealed role because the driver is specified to be capable of ported performance (which is a small but real compromise),however, a quality ported sub can do fairly well with music. Here are the FR's Josh Ricci measured for the different modes of the ported SVS PB13 Ultra (there are more tuning options, but this gives you a sense without too much clutter). As you can see the "sealed" mode (pink) does a decent job of looking like a sealed subwoofer:

This is a good post KEW, a lot of great insight here. One point I slightly disagree with is I think you might be overstating the idea that a variable tuned sub with sealed configuration ability would somehow not perform as well as a natively sealed subwoofer. While there is some reasoning to think that would be the case, ie, drivers perform best in optimized enclosures, and a driver built for a certain enclosure type suffers in non-optimal enclosure types and volumes, in practice, this just is not the case. Larger cabinets allow for greater efficiency. This almost always means overall better performance can be had from running a ported sub sealed vs a smaller sealed sub, all other things being equal. The only advantage a natively sealed sub can have is it does not need the aggressive filtering that ported subs need below tuning frequency. This can give you a bit more room gain- but I would also argue that room gain from sealed subs tends to be overstated.

 

[annunaki]

All these replies and no one stopped to ask the OP a few questions.

To the OP:

What speakers are you currently using and what is their F3 (how low are they rated for)?

What receiver are you using and does it have bass management capabilities?

What type of music do you listen to most often?

What are some of the best subs you have heard before, your reference standard so to speak?

 

[Irvrobinson]

All these replies and no one stopped to ask the OP a few questions.

To the OP:

What speakers are you currently using and what is their F3 (how low are they rated for)?

What receiver are you using and does it have bass management capabilities?

What type of music do you listen to most often?

What are some of the best subs you have heard before, your reference standard so to speak?

For main speakers, he acknowledged Revel F208s earlier in the thread.

 

[Irvrobinson]

My opinion on this is that SVS tunes their less expensive sealed subs to behave more like a ported sub. IOW, instead of having a gradual roll-off they have a fairly abrupt "knee" with a fast drop off below it. Here is the FR for the SB1000 (12" - sealed). The "knee" is around 27Hz. This is not "sealed sub" performance, and SVS gives you no way to adjust or tune it!

I am happy to see that the new SVS SB2000 departs from their previous 2nd tier model in that they are no longer aggressively tuning it to try to get 20Hz flat anechoic response. This graph says a lot!

This is a more typical sealed sub response with a gradual roll-off start in the 35-40Hz area! (I do believe SVS adds some DSP, but not nearly so aggressive as the SB1000). If you added the same 7dB/octave room gain starting at 40Hz to the SB1000, you would quickly realize that you have bloated lower bass which will cause your entire system to just sound muddy!

Let's think about this. SVS is aggressively pushing the limits of their least expensive sealed sub to extend anechoically flat down to around 27Hz, while taking their next model with a better driver and a larger box and more or less allowing it to behave naturally.
SVS knows a lot about designing subs, but they are also the most successful ID sub company (I don't know this as absolute fact, but they seem the biggest/most growth). So the only conclusion I can reach is they have made a marketing decision to have the SB1000 impress unsophisticated buyers with amazingly deep bass coming from a comparatively small box at the deliberate expense of sound quality, and that is working for them.
I personally could see using the SB1000 in an all HT system where the sloppy bass would just be more Umph when the dinosaurs stomp (and that is kind of cool and often still not as much Umph as reality - in the case of a near-by explosion). But the last thing I want is more Umph when a low note or bass drum hit happens in music, I want properly balanced Umph!

That's a very interesting theory, Kurt, but I use an SB1000 in my desktop system and it doesn't sound anything like what you're describing. At least for music, no sloppy or muddy bass that I can discern. I'm willing to accept the unsophisticated tag. Of course, this is a desktop system, so overall IMO it sounds sub-optimal all the time. For movies, I have no idea what accurate bass sounds like, when everything in action movies seems to have synthesized sub-harmonics. It doesn't sound any more bloated than the Klipsch RF62-IIs (without subs) I use in my HT system, though the HT system sounds much better overall. Mostly the SB1000 is very small and inexpensive, and if it were larger or substantially more expensive I wouldn't have bought it, because it wouldn't fit properly in the venue, it would have blown my self-imposed budget, or it could get me evicted.

 

[Mikado463]

All these replies and no one stopped to ask the OP a few questions.

To the OP:

What speakers are you currently using and what is their F3 (how low are they rated for)?

What receiver are you using and does it have bass management capabilities?

What type of music do you listen to most often?

What are some of the best subs you have heard before, your reference standard so to speak?

Like Irv stated, the OP listed his equipment in his opening post. As for the last two questions, it's far more important to understand room interaction IMO, thus my post with a link to a room very similar in volume to his.

 

[Forsooth]

My opinion on this is that SVS tunes their less expensive sealed subs to behave more like a ported sub. IOW, instead of having a gradual roll-off they have a fairly abrupt "knee" with a fast drop off below it...<SNIP>

Kurt -- thanks for the information and the charts regarding SVS subwoofers, etc. As a matter of fact, the SVS subs I am considering are the SB-2000 series (12"). It is good to know that they have sonic improvements (e.g., less accelerated roll-off on the lower end than the SB-1000 subs). I was thinking that the primary difference was probably related to better internal bracing and maybe some cosmetics.

"I have a pair of e112's in great condition that I'll give you a deal on!"

Wow, looked those up and they are retailing for $2100 ea, plus they weigh in at over 70 lbs. per sub, I'd better pass this time, but if I ever get into HT, I'll check back to see if they're still available.

 

[KEW]

That's a very interesting theory, Kurt, but I use an SB1000 in my desktop system and it doesn't sound anything like what you're describing. At least for music, no sloppy or muddy bass that I can discern. I'm willing to accept the unsophisticated tag. Of course, this is a desktop system, so overall IMO it sounds sub-optimal all the time. For movies, I have no idea what accurate bass sounds like, when everything in action movies seems to have synthesized sub-harmonics. It doesn't sound any more bloated than the Klipsch RF62-IIs (without subs) I use in my HT system, though the HT system sounds much better overall. Mostly the SB1000 is very small and inexpensive, and if it were larger or substantially more expensive I wouldn't have bought it, because it wouldn't fit properly in the venue, it would have blown my self-imposed budget, or it could get me evicted.

Interesting! I kind of see the SVS SB2000 graph (and Ricci's comment on what measurement would indicate a "tight and fast" sub) as validation of my theory. My first experience is with an SVS SB12-plus which was at its best when I had it close to the center of the room (minimizing room gain) and using the built-in PEQ set at 20Hz and maximum cut!. It was pretty good in this configuration, but it always struck me as a perverse irony that I paid extra for the built-in DSP and driver quality to be able to do ~20Hz flat anechoically, only to deliberately undo it!!! I bought the JL Audio e112's thinking I was getting the "ultimate" sealed sub only to experience the same issue (but moreso)! Gene seems to like his, but I assume that is because it is in his family/kid room and sees primary use in HT (or he has used DSP to tune it the way he wants).

At the same time, I know you have deep audio experience. So I don't know! I think your system is freaky!

Trying to think of explanations:
1) I assume this room is not large, but placement in the room may reduce room gain
2) Your LP may be in a null (but I suspect you would notice that when you move in and out of the LP).
3) There is a high pass filter somewhere in your signal chain that is removing the low frequencies that would show the room gain issue.
4) your content is absent low frequency content
5) you are playing at low levels such that the perceived loudness contour compensates for room gain
6) the DSP in your unit is not active

Another possible angle on this is that my problem was caused more by ringing induced by the DSP in my SB-12plus and e112 than the FR and your SB1000 being newer may have an advanced treatment of the DSP that significantly reduces the ringing (I'm not sure that the e112 is older). But that seems like a "reach" as I have heard of no such breakthrough and it would make sense for SVS to brag on it if a technology improved their subs significantly!

If nothing from this, I am at a loss to explain the difference between your experience and mine!

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Interesting! I kind of see the SVS SB2000 graph (and Ricci's comment on what measurement would indicate a "tight and fast" sub) as validation of my theory. My first experience is with an SVS SB12-plus which was at its best when I had it close to the center of the room (minimizing room gain) and using the built-in PEQ set at 20Hz and maximum cut!. It was pretty good in this configuration, but it always struck me as a perverse irony that I paid extra for the built-in DSP and driver quality to be able to do ~20Hz flat anechoically, only to deliberately undo it!!! I bought the JL Audio e112's thinking I was getting the "ultimate" sealed sub only to experience the same issue (but moreso)! Gene seems to like his, but I assume that is because it is in his family/kid room and sees primary use in HT (or he has used DSP to tune it the way he wants).

At the same time, I know you have deep audio experience. So I don't know! I think your system is freaky!

Trying to think of explanations:
1) I assume this room is not large, but placement in the room may reduce room gain
2) Your LP may be in a null (but I suspect you would notice that when you move in and out of the LP).
3) There is a high pass filter somewhere in your signal chain that is removing the low frequencies that would show the room gain issue.
4) your content is absent low frequency content
5) you are playing at low levels such that the perceived loudness contour compensates for room gain
6) the DSP in your unit is not active

Another possible angle on this is that my problem was caused more by ringing induced by the DSP in my SB-12plus and e112 than the FR and your SB1000 being newer may have an advanced treatment of the DSP that significantly reduces the ringing (I'm not sure that the e112 is older). But that seems like a "reach" as I have heard of no such breakthrough and it would make sense for SVS to brag on it if a technology improved their subs significantly!

If nothing from this, I am at a loss to explain the difference between your experience and mine!

Kurt, I only have a few seconds but wanted to ask. What is the room construction type that your issues were in? Concrete vs suspended etc. for instance my friend has a pair of small jbl towers on a second floor(suspended) that can be quite obnoxious even without his 10” subs. On my concrete floor,(which is also much much larger in volume) there is a much higher degree of tolerance. I have tried a polk psw505(just for fun) and even when I eq it flat, it needs to be crossed very low, otherwise it sounds flabby and loose. The sb2k sounded very good(mixed with my PC’s) but couldn’t muster enough output. In a small room though, I would think a pair would be excellent.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Trying to think of explanations:
1) I assume this room is not large, but placement in the room may reduce room gain
2) Your LP may be in a null (but I suspect you would notice that when you move in and out of the LP).
3) There is a high pass filter somewhere in your signal chain that is removing the low frequencies that would show the room gain issue.
4) your content is absent low frequency content
5) you are playing at low levels such that the perceived loudness contour compensates for room gain
6) the DSP in your unit is not active

Another possible angle on this is that my problem was caused more by ringing induced by the DSP in my SB-12plus and e112 than the FR and your SB1000 being newer may have an advanced treatment of the DSP that significantly reduces the ringing (I'm not sure that the e112 is older). But that seems like a "reach" as I have heard of no such breakthrough and it would make sense for SVS to brag on it if a technology improved their subs significantly!

If nothing from this, I am at a loss to explain the difference between your experience and mine!

The room is small; I'm not sure of the exact dimensions, but I'd guess 12x14. The sub is placed in a corner, maybe two feet from the back wall and perhaps a foot or so from the side wall. (I'm not in the same location as that system at the time of this posting, so I'm guessing.)

The Audioengine 5+ pair are running full-range. According to my in-room measurements without the sub I see a steep roll-off in the 5+ response below about 48Hz, and it's a bit ragged below 80Hz.

The SB1000 has its low-pass filter set to 50Hz.

I can definitely hear the difference when watching movies and listening to music between the SB1000 being switched on and off. It's not subtle, so there is low frequency material in the source content.

My average listening level is about 72-75db at my listening seat for movies, less for music (which is mostly solo piano or strings),perhaps 65-70db.

The DSP in my unit appears to be working fine.

My in-room measurements show some lumpiness across the audio spectrum; this is a desk top system, so the speaker placement is terrible. There's apparently a narrow room mode centered at 57Hz, and slightly wider one at 42Hz. Listening with test tones reveal a mostly smooth response to about 30Hz at 85db at my listening seat perhaps 8 feet away. At 85db the 25Hz test tone was inaudible, though I could feel it a little. The bass range in general is about 3-6db hotter than the spectrum above 2KHz.

 

[KEW]

Kurt, I only have a few seconds but wanted to ask. What is the room construction type that your issues were in? Concrete vs suspended etc. for instance my friend has a pair of small jbl towers on a second floor(suspended) that can be quite obnoxious even without his 10” subs. On my concrete floor,(which is also much much larger in volume) there is a much higher degree of tolerance. I have tried a polk psw505(just for fun) and even when I eq it flat, it needs to be crossed very low, otherwise it sounds flabby and loose. The sb2k sounded very good(mixed with my PC’s) but couldn’t muster enough output. In a small room though, I would think a pair would be excellent.

Interesting thought. I don't fully understand room gain and whether it is actually exciting resonance of the walls or reflecting the sound back into the room. I would expect on-grade slab or concrete with rebar not to reflect better but not be easily excited! @shadyJ , do have any research links on construction (material and/or design) and room gain?
One home had a crawl space under the room, the other a basement. Both were standard stick 'n frame construction. I'm not sure I understand your use of suspended regarding floor. I guess you could say they were suspended between the load bearing concrete foundation walls, but I think of suspended as being hung from above (such as a suspension bridge with cables down to the road from a superstructure).

How about it, @Irvrobinson , is your SB1000 on slab (be it at grade or elevated)?

 

[Irvrobinson]

How about it, @Irvrobinson , is your SB1000 on slab (be it at grade or elevated)?

Apparently both. It is on the third floor, but the leasing agent told me the floor structure includes 2 inches of concrete. I'm not sure if that's true, she was trying to talk me into a second floor unit, but the floor is much more solid that it was in my previous third floor apartment in the Bay Area.

 

[KEW]

Maybe it is corrugated steel subfloor with 2" poured above it?
Is it a 2 story building or does it go higher?

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Interesting thought. I don't fully understand room gain and whether it is actually exciting resonance of the walls or reflecting the sound back into the room. I would expect on-grade slab or concrete with rebar not to reflect better but not be easily excited! @shadyJ , do have any research links on construction (material and/or design) and room gain?
One home had a crawl space under the room, the other a basement. Both were standard stick 'n frame construction. I'm not sure I understand your use of suspended regarding floor. I guess you could say they were suspended between the load bearing concrete foundation walls, but I think of suspended as being hung from above (such as a suspension bridge with cables down to the road from a superstructure).

How about it, @Irvrobinson , is your SB1000 on slab (be it at grade or elevated)?

I guess what I mean by suspended would be like the second or third level of a house where the floor is made up of plywood over floor joists. IME these floors act like a seating riser whereas the whole thing vibrates which adds tactile feel(one reason people put their seats on risers) and also seems to add spl into the room. Like being in a drum maybe? Concrete by comparison tends to absorb bass energy which can be a double edged sword if you will.
In Irv’s case, I’d venture a guess that the 2” concrete lining of his floors would allow his room to behave like house on a concrete slab vs a second floor wood construction.

 

[Irvrobinson]

Maybe it is corrugated steel subfloor with 2" poured above it?
Is it a 2 story building or does it go higher?

Three stories. I'm on the third floor. She did not successfully convince me I could tolerate having anyone above me. This is California, so everything residential (and a lot of commercial too) is a wood structure, hence my skepticism about the concrete.

 

[shadyJ]

Interesting thought. I don't fully understand room gain and whether it is actually exciting resonance of the walls or reflecting the sound back into the room. I would expect on-grade slab or concrete with rebar not to reflect better but not be easily excited! @shadyJ , do have any research links on construction (material and/or design) and room gain?
One home had a crawl space under the room, the other a basement. Both were standard stick 'n frame construction. I'm not sure I understand your use of suspended regarding floor. I guess you could say they were suspended between the load bearing concrete foundation walls, but I think of suspended as being hung from above (such as a suspension bridge with cables down to the road from a superstructure).

How about it, @Irvrobinson , is your SB1000 on slab (be it at grade or elevated)?

The kind of room gain we are talking about is called pressure vessel gain, where lower frequencies get an inordinate amount of boost with respect to higher frequencies. Regarding the acoustic absorption of pressure vessel gain, I don't have any specific links to research on this subject at hand (although I am sure google scholar could turn up lots), but I don't think that pressure vessel gain specifically is affected by damping characteristics of room surfaces. Walls that flex, ie., are not stiff, like a thin panel of sheetrock, would damp a pressure wave and therefore reduce SPL. A very stiff flat surface like concrete reflects the pressure wave and does not reduce its energy as much.

A suspended floor might have more tactile feel since the floor is much more affected by the air pressure waves, however a room without such absorptive surfaces will have less SPL losses from damping surfaces. Think of the differences between an anechoic chamber and a reverberant chamber.

 

[annunaki]

For main speakers, he acknowledged Revel F208s earlier in the thread.

My bad I missed it

 

[John Parks]

Three stories. I'm on the third floor. She did not successfully convince me I could tolerate having anyone above me. This is California, so everything residential (and a lot of commercial too) is a wood structure, hence my skepticism about the concrete.

Is your residence a single tenant or multi family structure? It is quite common for apartments or condominiums to be stick construction but have gyp-crete (up to 2" or so) poured over a wood sub floor. It is not as inert as concrete on a steel sub floor (as @KEW suggested) but is loads (no pun intended because, you know, concrete) better than a straight plywood on wood joists. I'd have to look up the STC, which may prove interesting.

EDIT: I reread your comment earlier - third floor, etc.,