Monoprice Monolith 16” THX Ultra Subwoofer Performance Analysis

[Danzilla31]

It is possible that I could replace my media furniture with something smaller and add two subs one on each side. That is a possibility, and I may go there if this single Monolith 16 doesn't do it for me.

Also since your limited to how many subs you can put in they're I would go with the Rythmik FV25HP. Send back the FV18. If your limited to one sub and you need it to push that much air in that big of a space the Rythmik FV25HP is the way to go.

Also Monoprice M215

Or Rythmik Captivator 4000.

Since you can go big with 1 sub you might as well swing for the fences

 

[Danzilla31]

It is possible that I could replace my media furniture with something smaller and add two subs one on each side. That is a possibility, and I may go there if this single Monolith 16 doesn't do it for me.

Also have you tested to make sure the FV18 is in the best position in the room? Subs and bass can be very picky about placement

Have you done the sub crawl used REW and other measuring tools to see what the sub is doing at your listening position?

I know a lot of friends who bought monster subs were disappointed in they're performance turns out there was nothing wrong with the sub they were just sitting in a giant null and didn't realize it

 

[Danzilla31]

Also since your limited to how many subs you can put in they're I would go with the Rythmik FV25HP. Send back the FV18. If your limited to one sub and you need it to push that much air in that big of a space the Rythmik FV25HP is the way to go.

Also Monoprice M215

Or Rythmik Captivator 4000.

Since you can go big with 1 sub you might as well swing for the fences

Just know even then one sub even as massive as those are will probably not be enough in a room that big

But they will be better then what you have know

 

[Timforhifi]

I put both my Rythmik fv18 paper cone subs up front. I tried multiple areas in my 16’x9’x30’ room and few other spots were better by 1-2db at certain frequencies. I was willing to sacrifice a little performance for a better looking room.

 

[haraldo]

....... Some of us here, we love our Bass. And some more still than others. It's worth the effort to do it right.

IMHO it´s a lot more than about the bass, subwoofers make better midrange, foundation of music, voices become more natural and alive, fuller.... you sense the room.... even when there is no bass, a great subwoofer setup makes a world of difference I think

 

[ryanosaur]

IMHO it´s a lot more than about the bass, subwoofers make better midrange, foundation of music, voices become more natural and alive, fuller.... you sense the room.... even when there is no bass, a great subwoofer setup makes a world of difference I think

I agree. For those who take the time to listen well and integrate properly, this is absolutely a benefit.
I still know a lot of folk that think their Towers are more capable than a good sub and insist on a lower crossover point than will benefit the overall SQ of the Speaker.
I had a great conversation with Harbottle a bit ago and Cody actually looked for measurements of my Speaker to look for a recommendation of how high I should run a Sub for best integration… He was looking for evidence of compression effects and signs of other distortion in the Woofer to make that determination. For a Speaker that is good to 25Hz, his recommendation was to get a Sub that can go up higher and be able to cross at 100 or 110, requiring the Sub to stay strong to around 150.
In my own listening experiments, I started low and little by little pushed my cross higher. I stopped at 80 though, which makes me wonder… I got more clarity in the Mids and highs like you say… but what is left on the table?
In the end, it gets a lot more complicated than just saying a sub helps your Mids and Highs. It’s understanding not just the capabilities of both Speaker and Sub, but also their limitations and flaws. How you then manage the integration of each of those components, having sufficient overlap within their respective range, becomes the benchmark of success.

 

[haraldo]

I run my tower speakers full-range, and also subwoofer crossed around 90 Hz, that means both towers and subwoofers run in. parallell across a significant range..... Normally this would be a recipe for disaster, but I think in my case it works better than doing hi-pass on the main speakers..... I think this only works if there is 100% alignment on phase & time across all that passband and in my case I think I managed to nail it.
(This is like having 4 subwoofers + main towers doing part subwoofer work)

The towers have 4 active woofers each that is crossed at around 200Hz so they can manage to be pushed quite hard!

The benefit I think is not more powerful bass but much more even and tight bass, probably this only works when you have a fully automated system that controls eq + phase + time ... like Trinnov
Trying to do this by ear = for me: complete disaster

Are there actually any rules, what works and what does not work, I wonder?

 

[everettT]

Yeah understood, just curious why there is a discrepancy between what Monoprice publishes and what Audioholics published.

If you're looking for crazy output, a sub like this would be crippling in your large space. 25hz tune @125dbs per Ricci...

WTT WTS Danley OTHORN 21

Price is FIRM and for THE PAIR$1500 EACH FIRMWill trade for a newer pair of PSA 18

www.usaudiomart.com

 

[digital911]

Also I have a question regarding measuring parameters. Were these measurements RMS or Peak? The paragraph below seems to me to contradict itself.

"The above CEA-2010 measurements are short-term bursts that show the subwoofer’s clean peak SPL before heavy distortion sets in. Our measurements have been referenced to 2-meter RMS, which is 9 dB down from the standard requirement for the measurements to be shown at 1-meter peak. However most publicly available CEA-2010 measurements are shown at 2-meter RMS, so we followed that convention. "

So is it RMS or Peak?

 

[digital911]

You can compare the FV18 and the Monolith 16 Specs by comparing the Databass measurements of the Rythmik to the AH review of the Mono.
As I recall, there is very little difference between the two. Perhaps the Mono is a little stronger in the lower parts and the Rythmik was a little stronger in the mid bass? But comparatively, they are more alike than not.

FWIW, I agree with the general comments that doing two subs will likely get you more of what you are looking for. I would suggest 2 of the Mono 13s or 15s frankly over 1 16. I get that you may have an aesthetic concern. The flipside is you are clearly not getting the experience you are looking for.
To this latter point, the value of Bass output and where you get that output (infrasonic vs midbass) in a very large/extreme room is going to be a challenge no matter what. In the end, you have to decide which is more important and whether there is a compromise somehow.

When you get the other Sub in to try out, you should set them both up and run them together to see how that impacts your experience. Setting up 2 subs can be difficult, but can also work out quite well. With a little creativity and an open mind, you may well be able to do 2 15s and hide one in a corner or under a table.

Just spitballin. Some of us here, we love our Bass. And some more still than others. It's worth the effort to do it right.

Hey I was thinking the exact thing, I wanted to run them both simultaneously and see how it sounds!

Yes I was thinking of replacing an end table with a 2nd sub.

 

[everettT]

Also I have a question regarding measuring parameters. Were these measurements RMS or Peak? The paragraph below seems to me to contradict itself.

"The above CEA-2010 measurements are short-term bursts that show the subwoofer’s clean peak SPL before heavy distortion sets in. Our measurements have been referenced to 2-meter RMS, which is 9 dB down from the standard requirement for the measurements to be shown at 1-meter peak. However most publicly available CEA-2010 measurements are shown at 2-meter RMS, so we followed that convention. "

So is it RMS or Peak?

When measuring a subwoofer the distance that most use is 2 meters. Regardless of the distance the wattage/voltage is the same 1w or 2.83 volts to achieve the initial measurements that are standardized. After that more voltage (translates to watts but voltage is simpler and easier to understand ) is applied to test the limits of the subwoofer, ie peaks, distortion, compression, etc..

 

[everettT]

Also I have a question regarding measuring parameters. Were these measurements RMS or Peak? The paragraph below seems to me to contradict itself.

"The above CEA-2010 measurements are short-term bursts that show the subwoofer’s clean peak SPL before heavy distortion sets in. Our measurements have been referenced to 2-meter RMS, which is 9 dB down from the standard requirement for the measurements to be shown at 1-meter peak. However most publicly available CEA-2010 measurements are shown at 2-meter RMS, so we followed that convention. "

So is it RMS or Peak?

There are some good articles on the Audioholics main page that go into how measurements are conducted, that would be a good place to start learning.

Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part I

Audioholics’ speaker reviews often contain detailed measurement graphs. In this article, we explain frequency response and the set of curves known as the 'Spin-O-Rama' to help you pick better product.

www.audioholics.com

 

[digital911]

Also since your limited to how many subs you can put in they're I would go with the Rythmik FV25HP. Send back the FV18. If your limited to one sub and you need it to push that much air in that big of a space the Rythmik FV25HP is the way to go.

Also Monoprice M215

Or Rythmik Captivator 4000.

Since you can go big with 1 sub you might as well swing for the fences

I asked about that sub but Enrico told me it's discontinued.

 

[Danzilla31]

I asked about that sub but Enrico told me it's discontinued.

What????!!!!! Ahhhhhh!!!!!!

I was planning on buying 2 of those and moving my FV18's to the back!!!!

I'm soooooo sad right now

 

[digital911]

There are some good articles on the Audioholics main page that go into how measurements are conducted, that would be a good place to start learning.

Understanding Loudspeaker Review Measurements Part I

Audioholics’ speaker reviews often contain detailed measurement graphs. In this article, we explain frequency response and the set of curves known as the 'Spin-O-Rama' to help you pick better product.

www.audioholics.com

I looked at the M13 Ultra review and it clearly states RMS so I am going to say this M16 Ultra is also RMS.

 

[digital911]

Fround this post from Tom V which explains my question:

"Depends if the measurements are peak or rms value. Brent uses peak, all of the data on the chart is rms. To go from peak to rms subtract another 3dB.


1 meter peak (all the Brent Butterworth data) is 9dB higher than 2 meter rms(all the Josh Ricci and Audioholic data). The chart uses 2 meter RMS.


2010 CEA does mandate everything scaled to 1 meter, peak. We decided to go with 2 meter RMS because we feel this more closely related to what could be expected in a real world room. (the same thing I've seen Josh say when asked). At the end of the day what is important is that the differing data sets be scaled properly for the most accurate comparisons.


Tom V.

Power Sound Audio "


*EDIT* Adding referenced URL https://www.avsforum.com/threads/svs-vs-hsu.1475924/page-5

 

[everettT]

I looked at the M13 Ultra review and it clearly states RMS so I am going to say this M16 Ultra is also RMS.

I'm confused are you talking about the amp rating, which is meaningless, or the measurement technique? Also, Audioholics did not test the amp, just drove it.

 

[digital911]

I'm confused are you talking about the amp rating, which is meaningless, or the measurement technique? Also, Audioholics did not test the amp, just drove it.

I asked two questions.

1) Why is the M16 Amplifier rated for 2000 watt RMS by Monoprice, yet Audioholics says it's 1800 watt RMS. (I don't know this answer).

2) Is the Audioholics CEA measurement parameters PEAK or RMS? ( I now believe they are RMS)

 

[everettT]

I asked two questions.

1) Why is the M16 Amplifier rated for 2000 watt RMS by Monoprice, yet Audioholics says it's 1800 watt RMS. (I don't know this answer).

2) Is the Audioholics CEA measurement parameters PEAK or RMS? ( I now believe they are RMS)

1). Not sure but again, it's absolutely irrelevant
2) which measurements, as there are many with in the CEA standards and what peak and rms are you referring to? The standard is clearly defined as to what the parameters are that are to be used when testing. The amplifier specs are not part of this.

 

[William Lemmerhirt]

1). Not sure but again, it's absolutely irrelevant
2) which measurements, as there are many with in the CEA standards and what peak and rms are you referring to? The standard is clearly defined as to what the parameters are that are to be used when testing. The amplifier specs are not part of this.

Way too much weight placed on wattage. The only thing that matters is performance. Period.
This room needs devastators.