HSU VTF-15H Subwoofer Review

[templemaners]

i didnt look for the aperion's yet..i would have to check and wich dealer have them so i could audition them here near my place...that means at least one hour drive lol....but i have been looking at some jbl too..would those bests the studio60's?

Aperions I believe are internet direct only. According to their website, they ship free to Canada, but don't seem to have the two way free shipping home audition they have for the lower 48 states. They also appear to charge a 14% Canadian duty charge on your order total.

See the bottom of this:
http://www.aperionaudio.com/ReturnPolicy.aspx

and the Canadian bullet here:
http://www.aperionaudio.com/Help/shipping_faq.aspx

 

[tgeorge34]

I have been reading all of the posts about this sub, but I have one question. I have always had rear ported subs, and have liked the sound of the bass coming out of the port and having a chance to hit the wall. It makes it seem like there is more bass coming out of the sub. I turned my current sub around (VTF-1) with the ports facing me, and it didn't seem to be as full. Does this sub provide plenty of bass without having to face the ports into the corner of the wall?

 

[KEW]

This mode was filling the room with greater pressure but i felt like missing that tighness compared to sealed and since i love tightness i decided to try it one port plugged and still on EQ2 and then BINGO!..i found it the best damn subwoofer i ever had owned and heard!!...no problem earing the mid bass...very punchy and clean and also tighter then ported! with a lot of deep extention.....since i was disturbed by some neighbours and some friends this afternoon i didnt had the chance to watch and listen to any movies yet....now is that an upgrade for me?..YES...do i regret this purchase?...NO!...in fact i am so happy!!...this is the best damn move i made since a long time!...does that subwoofer cost less then the paradigm sub12 i had YES!...is it better then the sub12..YES!....does it cost twice less then the sub12 YES!....NOW..is this HSU the best subwoofer in the shootout maybe and surely not according to the reviews and price gap between them...is this HSU the BEST BUY like Paul staded?..i think yes!...a subwoofer at this price range sounding that good!...well i want another and another!!....I know this isnt a professional review with any measuring tools and its worth nothing for some of you but i wanted to post it anyway....A HAPPY GUY IS A HAPPY GUY!...OH AND YES I WILL GET MORE VTF-15H IN MY SYSTEM SOONER THEN LATER!!...thx.

Congratulation!
So, have you listened to Breathe again to see how much more you can push before it starts to have the type of problems the Sub12 did?

 

[clouso]

Congratulation!
So, have you listened to Breathe again to see how much more you can push before it starts to have the type of problems the Sub12 did?

yes i did test that!...with all the same settings on my receiver and even 2 db's subwoofer level higher!...at same volume with the same song....that ''paper'' woofer..jk... took it with out even sweating where the sub 12 was botomming out and ''clapping''......thats -20db on my receiver wich is pretty loud even for music!...

 

[billy p]

yes i did test that!...with all the same settings on my receiver and even 2 db's subwoofer level higher!...at same volume with the same song....that ''paper'' woofer..jk... took it with out even sweating where the sub 12 was botomming out and ''clapping''......thats -20db on my receiver wich is pretty loud even for music!...

I know everything is relative in terms of how each subwoofer interacts in room and their overall senitivity but -20dbs with a properly calibrated set up is only about ~85dbs in room...that IMO is not very loud.

Just saying...

 

[clouso]

I know everything is relative in terms of how each subwoofer interacts in room and their overall senitivity but -20dbs with a properly calibrated set up is only about ~85dbs in room...that IMO is not very loud.

Just saying...

depends on each receiver...i have been told that my -20bd on my receiver can and could not be the same then on another kind of receiver...i swear that at -20bd it is quite loud...lol...anyways i wanted to test it at the same volume level then where the sub 12 was struggling and the HSU didnt and i even got the sub level 2bd's higher

 

[Pyrrho]

You serious Clark? It took me all of 2 seconds to find 2 contradictions. I'm a Rythmik fan, but this article did have several blatant contradictions. Can you find them?


Pros
Smart Styling and manageable size
Very Inexpensive for performance capabilities
Reasonable high outputs without high power
Interesting port design making maximum use of internal volume
“Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer
Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth
7 year warranty on woofer, 2 years on amplifier
30 day satisfaction guarantee
Cons
Big and heavy – not easily moved by a single person (123 pounds)
Cheap Volume Control on Amplifier (No detents or easily repeatable settings)
No remote control
Plastic 5-way binding posts give amplifier a cheap appearance
Relatively low RMS power output capabilities (350 Watt “Continuous”) limits low frequency extension

I only see one thing that a careless reader would regard as a contradiction, and that is the first pro and the first con. "Manageable size" does not necessarily mean easily manageable, so not being easily moved by one person does not contradict the "manageable size" claim. You should remember that some very expensive subwoofers are very large, and not something that most people could move by themselves. For example, the Velodyne DD 1812 SE weighs 385 pounds:

http://www.velodyne.com/products/specs/DD_1812_Sign.html

with a shipping weight of 450 pounds:

http://www.velodyne.com/vproducts/detailpdf/DD 1812 SE_Details.pdf

That is a weight that is not manageable for most individuals. The 123 pounds (of the Hsu) is manageable, but not easily manageable.

Now, if you have any real contradictions, please state them explicitly. Otherwise, stop making libelous statements.

 

[cantonguy]

That is a weight that is not manageable for most individuals. The 123 pounds (of the Hsu) is manageable, but not easily manageable.
.

haha. I can see that we will not be agreeing on anything with a statement like this.

 

[billy p]

Here is my analogy...why does it matter if the pool is 8ft or 80ft deep you still can't touch the bottom... No pun intended but dead weigh is still dead weight making hard to move..

 

[Pyrrho]

Here is my analogy...why does it matter if the pool is 8ft or 80ft deep you still can't touch the bottom... No pun intended but dead weigh is still dead weight making hard to move..

I can move 123 pounds by myself, though I don't like moving that much by myself, especially when it is a bulky item that is not easy to grab onto. I would not move 385 pounds by myself (excluding having equipment, like a forklift, which, like most people, I do not have in my home). So for me, the difference is very significant if I ever would want to move it.

Now, for someone who is too weak to move 123 pounds, it may not matter. But even with people who can't move that much weight by themselves, they could have a second wimpy friend and together they might be able to move 123 pounds, but there is no way the two of them are going to move 385 pounds together if they are unable to move 123 pounds separately. So it can matter for weaklings, too.

For a good subwoofer that is relatively easy to move, I strongly recommend SVS cylinder subwoofers, as they are low weight for how good they are, and the shape is easier to grab onto than most large subwoofers. Even the Ultra weighs a mere 90 pounds:

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-cyl-pc13ultra.cfm

(The cheaper models weigh less.)

They are able to make them lightweight due to the shape. With a curve, it is stronger than a flat surface of the same material and thickness, so they are able to make the sides of the cylinder subwoofers thinner and lighter to achieve the same strength as an ordinary box, which makes them significantly lighter. The box version of the Ultra weighs 155 pounds:

http://www.svsound.com/products-sub-box-pb13ultra.cfm

So you can see that the weight savings for the cylinder is considerable. And in practice, the difference in carrying them is even greater than the mere weight difference would suggest, as the cylinder shape is easier to grab onto than a big box.


It would be even better if they made some unpowered versions, like they used to. I have a pair of these:

http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_9_2/svs-cs-ultra-subwoofers-5-2002.html

They are a mere 72 pounds each, and have a shape that is relatively easy to grab onto. I have no difficulty in moving them as much as I want. I can even hold one under one arm if I wish.

 

[sharkman]

I only see one thing that a careless reader would regard as a contradiction, and that is the first pro and the first con. "Manageable size" does not necessarily mean easily manageable, so not being easily moved by one person does not contradict the "manageable size" claim. You should remember that some very expensive subwoofers are very large, and not something that most people could move by themselves. For example, the Velodyne DD 1812 SE weighs 385 pounds:

...

Now, if you have any real contradictions, please state them explicitly. Otherwise, stop making libelous statements.

Pros
* Smart Styling and manageable size
* Very Inexpensive for performance capabilities
* Reasonable high outputs without high power
* Interesting port design making maximum use of internal volume
* “Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer
* Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth
* 7 year warranty on woofer, 2 years on amplifier
* 30 day satisfaction guarantee

Cons
* Big and heavy – not easily moved by a single person (123 pounds)
* Cheap Volume Control on Amplifier (No detents or easily repeatable settings)
* No remote control
* Plastic 5-way binding posts give amplifier a cheap appearance
* Relatively low RMS power output capabilities (350 Watt “Continuous”) limits low frequency extension

I don't think you are being objective.

In the "pro" list it states smart styling and manageable size, and Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth. Then one "con" is that it's big and heavy. That is a plain contradiction, and yes I read all your comments on the matter but it simply doesn't make sense to complement its manageable size and narrow cabinet profile yet criticize it as big. Yeah, it's heavy.

Then another pro is reasonable high output without high power. How can you call that a pro when a con listed is that it has low RMS output capabilities. Then in the body of the review it's stated that he couldn't get any noticeable difference by adjusting the "Q" control with music, yet a pro listed is the “Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer. How can it be a pro if it doesn't work?

Yet another contradiction is calling the 7 year warranty on the woofer a pro, and then going into some length to criticize the woofer's construction, even mentioning it could burn if overheated enough(ANYTHING can burn if heated enough). The sub is called a best buy, but then the amp is criticized at length, the gain control, the crossover, the woofer and the below 20Hz performance, though he never bothered to test the max extension configuration of the sub.

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the same reviewer also auditioned the SVS sub, which cost $1399. He lists for it a con that it doesn't come with a remote. This same criticism is made of the Hsu sub, although it's over $500 cheaper. That doesn't really add up.

The reviewer does mention I think that things were a bit hurried and he didn't have time to test the sub with the vent plugs, and I think this review could have used some editing.

 

[cantonguy]

I don't think you are being objective.

In the "pro" list it states smart styling and manageable size, and Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth. Then one "con" is that it's big and heavy. That is a plain contradiction, and yes I read all your comments on the matter but it simply doesn't make sense to complement its manageable size and narrow cabinet profile yet criticize it as big. Yeah, it's heavy.

Then another pro is reasonable high output without high power. How can you call that a pro when a con listed is that it has low RMS output capabilities. Then in the body of the review it's stated that he couldn't get any noticeable difference by adjusting the "Q" control with music, yet a pro listed is the “Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer. How can it be a pro if it doesn't work?

Yet another contradiction is calling the 7 year warranty on the woofer a pro, and then going into some length to criticize the woofer's construction, even mentioning it could burn if overheated enough(ANYTHING can burn if heated enough). The sub is called a best buy, but then the amp is criticized at length, the gain control, the crossover, the woofer and the below 20Hz performance, though he never bothered to test the max extension configuration of the sub.

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the same reviewer also auditioned the SVS sub, which cost $1399. He lists for it a con that it doesn't come with a remote. This same criticism is made of the Hsu sub, although it's over $500 cheaper. That doesn't really add up.

The reviewer does mention I think that things were a bit hurried and he didn't have time to test the sub with the vent plugs, and I think this review could have used some editing.

Glad to see someone else agrees with me... he had me convinced I was crazy. He doesn't seem like a guy you can reason with.

 

[GranteedEV]

In the "pro" list it states smart styling and manageable size, and Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth. Then one "con" is that it's big and heavy. That is a plain contradiction, and yes I read all your comments on the matter but it simply doesn't make sense to complement its manageable size and narrow cabinet profile yet criticize it as big. Yeah, it's heavy.

It's big. It's heavy. And it's manageable. Not a contradiction. Just an unfortunate reality. It's not a sub you would recommend for a person looking for a cubic foot box to shove in the corner but it's not a box you should expect to push around easily, but it's also not a sub you should need a forklift for (of which some do exist). What's contradictory about that?

Then another pro is reasonable high output without high power. How can you call that a pro when a con listed is that it has low RMS output capabilities.

RMS output is important as is Dynamic output. The HSU can do high output transients but won't be as well suited to sustain it for extended periods. make sense?

Then in the body of the review it's stated that he couldn't get any noticeable difference by adjusting the "Q" control with music, yet a pro listed is the “Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer. How can it be a pro if it doesn't work?

He specifically stated it didn't appear to do anything in the scenario where he tested it (both ports open). He alluded that it may do something moreso in a different configuration or that its effect is more subtle. He said the Q is variable for "FINE" tuning. As in, fine.

Yet another contradiction is calling the 7 year warranty on the woofer a pro, and then going into some length to criticize the woofer's construction, even mentioning it could burn if overheated enough(ANYTHING can burn if heated enough).

He mentioned that "paper only burns" but he didn't say that the woofer could burn. He was speaking from a sub designer's experience if you could read it properly. He didn't even imply that paper was a poor choice. Go reread his paragraph on a paper woofer.

The sub is called a best buy, but then the amp is criticized at length, the gain control, the crossover, the woofer and

Well duh. it's a great value but there's things in more expensive subs you do get. he wasn't being kind to it because it costs $900. He was fair.

the below 20Hz performance, though he never bothered to test the max extension configuration of the sub.

Yes, he should have listened in the low extention mode, but relative to the other subs in the shootout it's not like he tested the rythmik in the same mode either. Of course he did point out if you actually read the review that the lower extention mode should give you more 20hz at the cost of 25-32hz output.

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the same reviewer also auditioned the SVS sub, which cost $1399. He lists for it a con that it doesn't come with a remote. This same criticism is made of the Hsu sub, although it's over $500 cheaper. That doesn't really add up.

Why not? Maybe he means that remotes are a big deal to him. You're just nitpicking personal disagreements here.

 

[Pyrrho]

I don't think you are being objective.

In the "pro" list it states smart styling and manageable size, and Narrow cabinet profile containing most volume in the cabinet depth. Then one "con" is that it's big and heavy. That is a plain contradiction, and yes I read all your comments on the matter but it simply doesn't make sense to complement its manageable size and narrow cabinet profile yet criticize it as big. Yeah, it's heavy.

You are simply wrong. Being relatively narrow does not make it small, nor does it prevent it from being big and heavy. It may be an advantage to be narrow, and it may be manageable in its size, but that does not make it easily manageable nor does it make it light.

Then another pro is reasonable high output without high power. How can you call that a pro when a con listed is that it has low RMS output capabilities.

You seem to not actually read entire lines. The con is "Relatively low RMS power output capabilities (350 Watt “Continuous”) limits low frequency extension [emphasis added]". There is no contradiction in saying that a subwoofer has high output but limited low frequency extension.

If you take phrases out of context and then compare them with other phrases you take out of context, then you may find what you believe to be "contradictions." But that involves ignoring what is actually being stated in the review.

Then in the body of the review it's stated that he couldn't get any noticeable difference by adjusting the "Q" control with music, yet a pro listed is the “Q” control for fine tuning bottom end of woofer. How can it be a pro if it doesn't work?

Yet another contradiction is calling the 7 year warranty on the woofer a pro, and then going into some length to criticize the woofer's construction, even mentioning it could burn if overheated enough(ANYTHING can burn if heated enough).

So you think that a warranty and actual quality of construction are the same thing? Also, if you paid attention to what was said about the paper woofer, it was stated that that was fine.

The sub is called a best buy, but then the amp is criticized at length, the gain control, the crossover, the woofer and the below 20Hz performance, though he never bothered to test the max extension configuration of the sub.

Being a "best buy" means that it is the best AT ITS PRICE POINT. It does not mean that the product is perfect or could not be better, particularly if one is willing to spend more money. This subwoofer may be the best one can get at its price point, but that does not imply that it is the best that money can buy, or that it is impossible for a subwoofer to be better than it is.

Also, I could be wrong, but I think the same reviewer also auditioned the SVS sub, which cost $1399. He lists for it a con that it doesn't come with a remote. This same criticism is made of the Hsu sub, although it's over $500 cheaper. That doesn't really add up.

What the hell do you mean? Do you imagine that they come with remotes when they do not?

The reviewer does mention I think that things were a bit hurried and he didn't have time to test the sub with the vent plugs, and I think this review could have used some editing.

Most reviews could probably use some editing, as they are not usually literary masterpieces. But they do not need to be literary masterpieces. If they convey the appropriate information, and are not misleading, at least to those who are capable of reading the relevant language, then that is good enough.

 

[cantonguy]

I'm sorry guys... you know a lot more about subs than I do, but saying a PRO of the subwoofer is its manageable size and then a con is that it's "not easily moved" is a contradiction. This is very basic stuff here and I find it funny that you even try to argue it. I'm not trying to tear apart this review like others. I don't even think it was a bad review like most people. I would be very pleased if it were something I designed.

Try telling your wife that a PRO is she is skinny, but a con is that she is hard to carry. I bet the first thing to pop in her mind isn't how strong you are.

 

[GranteedEV]

Try telling your wife that a PRO is she is skinny, but a con is that she is hard to carry. I bet the first thing to pop in her mind isn't how strong you are.

No, It's like telling your wife she isn't fat, but she is hard to carry/not in the best shape she could possibly be in. You're seriously trying to make an issue out of something which shouldn't even be thought of as such.

 

[sharkman]

Glad to see someone else agrees with me... he had me convinced I was crazy. He doesn't seem like a guy you can reason with.

Where audio is concerned people do get passionate, myself included. But by the length of this particular thread, I think it's clear that many find this particular review to be troublesome.

 

[cantonguy]

Can you tell me the difference between telling a woman she "isn't fat" or telling her she "is skinny." My issue isn't the review... my issue is the fact that you don't see a manageable size and not easily moved as a contradiction.

They would have been better off saying " While this speaker is difficult to move, it is still manageable." Once you break it into PROS and CONS the meaning changes.

 

[sharkman]

Can you tell me the difference between telling a woman she "isn't fat" or telling her she "is skinny." My issue isn't the review... my issue is the fact that you don't see a manageable size and not easily moved as a contradiction.

They would have been better off saying " While this speaker is difficult to move, it is still manageable." Once you break it into PROS and CONS the meaning changes.

And my point was that the two descriptions of the sub remove the size of it from being a "pro" or a "con". Instead we have both. Same with the high output without high power in the pro section and then criticize its RMS power in the "con" section. The amp is small, doesn't have heat sinks, is a BASH(shudder) amp, has cheapish speaker terminals/gain knob, paper woofer(shudder), small crossover range BUT it's a best buy sub. Riiiight.

 

[jostenmeat]

I'm sorry guys... you know a lot more about subs than I do, but saying a PRO of the subwoofer is its manageable size and then a con is that it's "not easily moved" is a contradiction. This is very basic stuff here and I find it funny that you even try to argue it. I'm not trying to tear apart this review like others. I don't even think it was a bad review like most people. I would be very pleased if it were something I designed.

Try telling your wife that a PRO is she is skinny, but a con is that she is hard to carry. I bet the first thing to pop in her mind isn't how strong you are.

It's not the first time that a particular physical attribute made both the pro and con list for an AH sub review. This AH review here is four years old, and heavy made both the pro and con lists. The finish also makes both pro and con lists.

Regarding paper woofers, one of my front running candidates for a future DIY speaker build is the ER18, and the premise of the design here is not based on quite as many drivers or as complex of a build with something like a Zaph tower, but that it uses superior drivers from SEAS (of great repute). These are made of paper.