SB2000's - What should I do next?

[RedCharles]

I'm not getting as much umphhh as my PS505's had. The PB 2000's are a lot less boomy and bloated, but they don't hammer my chest the way my PS505's did.

I did the subwoofer crawl at 40hz with a db meter and found that the wall behind me was best, with the back right corner being the best spot in the room.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AvsO0rkUe83shrwsxYYOXCsvbFYFrA

However, my REW measurements are not even close to flat. Could be the mic. But apples to apples, these subs fall 10 db in the 30hz range just like the PS505's did too. However, they stay around that -10db range down to 10hz, whereas the PS505's just die below 30hz.

There's a part of me that just wants go buy two more subs, I'm pretty certain that would even out the bass. But Jesus, that's like 2500 bucks total. But there's another part of me that just wants to return these. I expected a flatter response, but I don't want buy a mini-dsp and mic for another 200 bucks to find out that this is the way it is.

Is the Mini-Dsp and calibrated mic a miracle cure for bass?

 

[massacre]

Trade them in and get 2 pb3000 done!

 

[JohnBooty]

Regardless of which subwoofer(s) you're running, deep bass is never going to be anywhere near flat "out of the box" without some serious EQ.

Is the Mini-Dsp and calibrated mic a miracle cure for bass?

No miracle cure, but it might be helpful.

I did the subwoofer crawl at 40hz with a db meter and found that the wall behind me was best, with the back right corner being the best spot in the room.

Just curious - you have two SB2000s, right? Where's the other one located?

I have a pair of SB1000s and I actually have the main speakers resting atop them. While probably not ideal, there aren't a lot of other placement options in the room, and that certainly simplifies some things. And since there are two subs instead of one, placement isn't super ideal.

I initially played with room EQ derived from MiniDSP measurements but ultimately abandoned that. Those measurements will vary greatly by listening position anyway, so unless you're willing to restrict yourself to a single listening position you'll have to average a bunch of measurements from different locations, which ultimately limits what you can do in terms of corrections.

(On the other hand, I'm really impressed by what Audyssey was able to do with the single sub in my living room, so maybe my REQ-fu and MiniDSP-fu were just weak)

As for "slam" I actually tend to feel that's more a function of mid-bass (like 50-100hz) than the really deep stuff. You could experiment with some boost in that region, maybe.

 

[lovinthehd]

Why would you do a crawl at a single frequency?

 

[lovinthehd]

Also some other information about setup other than the crawl at 40 hz would be interesting....how you set levels, delays, with what gear, etc.

 

[RedCharles]

MCACC, and then I tweak the MCACC speaker settings with my DB meter.

I tweak the settings on the subs based on the feel and sound of music. I use Judas Priest's "Painkiller", NIN's "Burn", and Donna Summer's "Bad Girls" to get a feel for the bass. I also listen to the the first battle scene in LOTR, where Sauron gets his fingers chopped off.

I haven't tweaked any delay settings, only levels on the receiver.

 

[RedCharles]

Why would you do a crawl at a single frequency?

Because I didn't want to do it five times. And what difference would it make? I mean, the room's not gonna change. I could test it again at different HZ, but I figure the two back corners would still read higher than the rest of the room.

 

[lovinthehd]

Where do you have them positioned, i.e. in terms of where in the room particularly? Equidistant so delay can be the same (distance is delay)? Or does your version of MCACC deal with dual subs for level/delay? Yes, your room will vary with sub position as well as frequency, usually suggested to use pink noise (like your avr's test tones) or at least music with a lot of bass frequency activity. How many dB are you tweaking from the MCACC base line for changes in level? What crossover are you using?

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

Because I didn't want to do it five times. And what difference would it make? I mean, the room's not gonna change. I could test it again at different HZ, but I figure the two back corners would still read higher than the rest of the room.

Difference? Well, wavelengths are frequencies, and each is very different. A 20hz wave is 56 feet long. A 40hz wave is about 28’. So those two frequencies alone will interact differently in the room. ylu should at least use the XO frequency, and maybe 20hz above and below to at least see how the subs blend with the mains.

The two back corners probably would read higher than the rest of the room but that’s not a given.
Also, your going from bloated ported subs, to smooth sealed ones. Around tune, it can take 4 sealed subs to equal the output of a comparable ported one. I think in your case, ported is the way to go.

 

[RedCharles]

Where do you have them positioned, i.e. in terms of where in the room particularly? Equidistant so delay can be the same (distance is delay)? Or does your version of MCACC deal with dual subs for level/delay? Yes, your room will vary with sub position as well as frequency, usually suggested to use pink noise (like your avr's test tones) or at least music with a lot of bass frequency activity. How many dB are you tweaking from the MCACC base line for changes in level? What crossover are you using?

80hz cross over.

For my speakers, I use the Pioneer test tone and match them all to the same DB.

And as for the subs, I turned them down about 5db with the PS505, but I haven't touched the MCACC setting yet with the 2000s.

Pioneer does have a distance setting though. And both subs are ~72 inches from head.

"Around tune, it can take 4 sealed subs to equal the output of a comparable ported one. I think in your case, ported is the way to go."

It's interesting how many people like ported subs over sealed ones. And from what I've read, people used to prefer sealed over ported.

 

[lovinthehd]

80hz cross over.

For my speakers, I use the Pioneer test tone and match them all to the same DB.

And as for the subs, I turned them down about 5db with the PS505, but I haven't touched the MCACC setting yet with the 2000s.

Pioneer does have a distance setting though. And both subs are ~72 inches from head.

"Around tune, it can take 4 sealed subs to equal the output of a comparable ported one. I think in your case, ported is the way to go."

It's interesting how many people like ported subs over sealed ones. And from what I've read, people used to prefer sealed over ported.

So you didn't re-run MCACC when incorporating the new subs?

 

[JohnBooty]

It's interesting how many people like ported subs over sealed ones. And from what I've read, people used to prefer sealed over ported.

My understanding is that the primary benefit of a sealed sub is the more gradual roll-off below the tuning frequency. Your typical ported sub would play strong down to say, 25hz, and then SPL would fall off of a cliff below that point.

As contrasted with a sealed sub of similar capabilities and tuning, which would have less overall output but would have a more gradual diminishing of output below 25hz. It's a far more natural sound and potentially less "boomy."

Nowadays, this advantage is mooted somewhat. A DSP-based approach (whether we're talking DSP built into the sub, the AVR, or an outboard solution like miniDSP) can allow the response of a ported sub to be altered to taste as long as you're willing to sacrifice a bit of headroom. Which is usually an excellent tradeoff, as modern subs tend to have power to spare.

 

[RedCharles]

So you didn't re-run MCACC when incorporating the new subs?

I did. My writing wasn't clear on that point.

 

[lovinthehd]

I did. My writing wasn't clear on that point.

Well you said you used the test tones with your spl meter....which was just running MCACC? And after re-running MCACC you left the sub level as-is with the new subs? No changing by using the spl meter? As to the distance of 6 ft, are they both in front of you or is one in front and one in back of you? What distance did MCACC set them to, the actual physical distance? What phase settings are you using?

 

[RedCharles]

They are both behind me. MCACC set all my speakers about a foot, foot and half further away than their actual distance. I just set them all to their actual distance. I'm going to change the DB settings tomorrow. The phase on the subs is set to zero.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

They are both behind me. MCACC set all my speakers about a foot, foot and half further away than their actual distance. I just set them all to their actual distance. I'm going to change the DB settings tomorrow. The phase on the subs is set to zero.

The reason it set the distance farther is to compensate for room anomalies, and the processing in the subs. You’d get a better impulse response by putting the distance back where it was. Or even adding a couple feet or so.

 

[lovinthehd]

Might also try flipping the phase (polarity really) to see what the stronger bass is....altho MCACC might already have tested that.

 

[shadyJ]

Room correction is mostly awful. Don't bother with MCACC.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I think multiple smaller subs are better than one big sub.

So if the EQ doesn't work out or if one big sub doesn't work out, you might have to change your approach to go with multiple smaller subs.

 

[lovinthehd]

Room correction is mostly awful. Don't bother with MCACC.

MCACC is still useful for setting delays/levels, especially if he has no setup tools otherwise....