Finnish subwoofer shootouts

droeses58

droeses58

Audioholic
Your nuts:eek: ...............in a good way,........ I think
 
Sheep

Sheep

Audioholic Warlord
wow, the PB-10ISD really held its own agains the EP600.


Very nice, have some gum! :)


SheepStar
 
jaxvon

jaxvon

Audioholic Ninja
Wow! Quick question though. It looks like you measured the EP600 on axis and the PB10 pi/2 radians off axis. Why is this? Or is it just the pictures before you measured the sub?
 
agarwalro

agarwalro

Audioholic Ninja
Hot damn, you ARE nuts

droeses58 said:
Your nuts:eek: ...............in a good way,........ I think
I will have to agree. 4 thumbs up from me. SVS PB-12 Ultra it is for me :D . I have been waiting for something like this to come around so that I can pull the trigger on my sub purchase.
 
ssabripo

ssabripo

Audioholic
agarwalro said:
I will have to agree. 4 thumbs up from me. SVS PB-12 Ultra it is for me :D . I have been waiting for something like this to come around so that I can pull the trigger on my sub purchase.

Ilkka did a tremendous job with these tests, and some feathers got rattled over at AVS and other forums.... :p

Like you, it helped make a decision on my SVS ultra, and now that I have it in hand, I could not agree more with the findings!! the Ultra is still, IMO, the benchmark at this price point.
 
I

Ilkka

Audioholic
jaxvon said:
Wow! Quick question though. It looks like you measured the EP600 on axis and the PB10 pi/2 radians off axis. Why is this? Or is it just the pictures before you measured the sub?
Since I measured the 2 m distance from the acoustic center of the enclosure, I just wanted to keep the driver and the vent as near as possible to that 2 meter distance. If one would turn the cabinet so that the driver and vent would point to the mic, SPL would increase around 0.5-1 dB. There are so many ways where from measure the 2 m distance, some go acoustic center, some go front baffle. But the differences aren't big, especially with small subwoofers like PB10.
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Ilkaa;

you did a nice job with your measurements. Talk about motivation. But there are some limitations to your testing methodology. We are putting the finishing touches on a subwoofer measurement guide which we are hopeful will quickly become an industry standard. Email me your email address and I will forward it to you when we it is completed.

Mark, our loudspeaker guru has never been a big fan of the THD philosophy.
Its a metric that doesn't take into account how the human hearing system will react to the mix.

THD doesn't take into account the spectral distrubution of the distortion products. A couple % THD is pretty much inaudible if the components are all second harmonic because of masking and the consonant interval formed by an octave. A couple % THD made up of 13th order harmonic, on the other hand, will sound nasty. Though numerically they may appear identical when specced by THD.

Plus I am not sure if you saw Ian's official response on the Axiom Board so here it is:

Re: EP-600 Review thread.

Thank you for the summary of the discussion at AVSForum. As you may have gathered, we have an issue with the test procedures used, which I brought up before these tests began. At the time, I was assured that these problems were going to be worked through together before any data went public; unfortunately that agreement and the opportunity to increase the accuracy and relevance of the results being tested were ignored after the subwoofer was shipped.

The two main problems with the procedure are the linearity accuracy and the relationship of THD & Noise to real world conditions. First for linearity; the frequency response measurement used by Ilkka, and quite a few others, utilizes a smoothing calculation. The problem with this is that products that are linear simply remain linear (and in fact may even be worsened by smoothing), by pulling down information at the crossover or filter points. The smoothed graph of the EP600, for example, shows a gentle sloping decline or roll-off at the filter points of 15Hz and 100Hz which does not appear in reality with precise measurements. Products that are not linear, however, are made linear by this technique. Linearity is a paramount indicator of the quality of the end performance and should never be modified by using smoothing, or a low number of data points, both of which will hide anomalies in frequency response.

The THD & Noise methodology used in the Finland test is to plot a graph of 7 points from 20 to 80 Hz at a max level of 10% THD. There are a number of problems with this. First, the general problem of noise occurring during the listening experience, such as woofer bottoming, happens below 20 Hz. So in order to relate such measurements as this to the listening experience two things need to be done: one is to establish at what level of THD & Noise the listener experience will be compromised, and two is to then apply this level to all frequencies. We use 100 data points between 150Hz and 10Hz to determine THD & Noise.

Once a level of volume is attained that has audible distortion - at any single frequency - that is your maximum SPL for all frequencies, because the distortion that occurred will intrude on the listening experience each time that frequency is produced. Obviously, listening to movies or music is a dynamic experience, and frequencies change constantly, so that volume is defacto the maximum logical usable SPL output. The method of plotting distortion at various frequencies, and then connecting those points like a response curve, is not a measurement that can be translated into any usable real world condition. For us at Axiom, we have determined through extensive listening tests that this level is when the THD & Noise exceeds the signal frequency. Neither the EP500 nor EP600 will allow the THD & Noise to exceed the signal level at any frequency no matter the volume level setting. If the tester decides that 10% THD & Noise is the level at which audible distortion will occur in the listening experience (our tests have never shown this to be the case), then this, at the very least, needs to be applied to all frequencies.

As you can see, this is a fascinating subject that has spawned numerous Audio Engineering Society papers and decades of research at the National Research Council (NRC). The real fun begins when you start to prove out each measured number utilizing scientifically controlled listening tests. I can hardly believe I have been doing this research for 25 years now but I look forward to continuing to discover more over the next 25 years.
 
brian32672

brian32672

Banned
My original post I was in the middle of editing = while Gene had posted.
I got some flack for it. So I will post after Gene's post.


Clearly the surprising numbers are on that EP600 (THD%). I have seen where others questioned wind noise, your testing methods, etc.. I think that is a bunch of horse dung. I am sure your measurements were just fine. Glad you posted your findings here. Thanks Ilkka.

Anyhow, Ilkka I would suggest you also post your link of TrueRTA for Dummies.
(Yes, I am one of those. However I have read your in depth tutorial. Thanks again.)

Also Ilkka nice find on the Velodyne 10" sub.
Link here = http://www.avtalk.co.uk/forum/index.php?t=msg&th=13376&start=0&rid=5915&SQ=1131809319
For all, even with high speed internet that link will take some time to DL.
 
R

Ron Temple

Senior Audioholic
ssabripo said:
and some feathers got rattled over at AVS and other forums.... :p

.
Hah, to say the least, 3 threads removed and I'm sure a 4th(soon to be). I don't know how Ilkka has any energy left.:D
 
R

RMK!

Guest
Can you people read?

Did you read Gene's post?

Yes, nice job Ilkka, nice job of posting slanted data. But that was the idea, wasn't it.:rolleyes:
 
brian32672

brian32672

Banned
hidog1 said:
Did you read Gene's post?

Yes, nice job Ilkka, nice job of posting slanted data. But that was the idea, wasn't it.:rolleyes:
Slanted Data????:confused:
I am wondering how anyone can say that was the idea.
To sit there and say, he was only doing all these tests to say "I told you so"

IMO, is bogus. Is everyone really trying to say that he faked the data, the equipment was no good, the sub was damaged (with no apperent damage), etc..
I would say, that these people are just unhappy to see this caliber of a piece of audio equipment show such poor #'s.

Why don't we just say that the B&K, SVS, etc.. tests were bogus as well.
They were all tested under the same conditions. Including wind conditions.....:eek:
 
K

korgoth

Full Audioholic
if your ead gene's post, as well as many others' posts, youd understand that by "slanting the data" he didnt mean the tests were innacurate, but instead insignificant, and in some cases unusable to real life applications.

the ep600 is a great sub from what ive heard.. There is no way you can justify a pb10 is almost as good. The pb10 is a good sub, but you really think it competes with a ep600? Ikka himself stated that the tests used might not have been the best tests..

then gene, a pretty knowledgable guy, supported that thought. The tests used, were in fact not ideal tests. Some were flat out unusable.

the review might be definately something to read and know about, but i wouldnt jump and say axiom sucks because of this one SEEMINGLY professional, review.
 
Last edited:
Sheep

Sheep

Audioholic Warlord
Who cares if the difference, in some areas, is inaudible. The point is the PB-10 basically performed at the same level, if not better, then a subwoofer 4 times the price. They both were measured under the same circumstances, so there's no slanting of data. If anything, its buyers remorse.


SheepStar
 
brian32672

brian32672

Banned
jetyi83 said:
but i wouldnt jump and say axiom sucks because of this one SEEMINGLY professional, review.
Who here so far has said Axiom sucks 'as you put it'?????
Sounds like a guilty conscience at work.:rolleyes:

I never said anything like that, did anyone????

I agree with Sheep. Were not the other 5 subs tested under the same equipment?
Thats why I had said, you might (not you personally) as well discount all of Illka's work.
And say all #'s he gave (not just PB-10 & EP600) are not as what most would want to hear.
And there needs to be a way to justify the same exact testing conditions.

Granted, the methology may be inaccurate. But then all test where done that way.
So then all of his objective tests, therefore are bogus....
 
K

korgoth

Full Audioholic
brian32672 said:
Who here so far has said Axiom sucks 'as you put it'?????
Sounds like a guilty conscience at work.:rolleyes:

...IMO, is bogus. Is everyone really trying to say that he faked the data, the equipment was no good, the sub was damaged (with no apperent damage), etc..
I would say, that these people are just unhappy to see this caliber of a piece of audio equipment show such poor #'s
ep600 is the only one with surprisingly low numbers. so i assumed you were talking about it.

and i own neither sub so i have no bias towards either.
but do you honestly think a pb10 can outpreform an ep500 or 600?

brian32672 said:
Granted, the methology may be inaccurate. But then all test where done that way.
So then all of his objective tests, therefore are bogus....
just because methodology was incorrect for one test doesnt mean it was done wrong for every test. plis its not just methodology but choice of tests. gene stated there are a few done that are meaningless. not all. and he gave specific examples

i havent personally heard either one. not sure if you have or havent.. but im just making an assumption from everything ive read (other than this review) that if i did, i would easily be able to say the ep600 outpreforms the pb10.

if youve heard both personally and disagree then i would be more convinced of your posts.

sheep too
 
Last edited:
majorloser

majorloser

Moderator
Sheep said:
Who cares if the difference, in some areas, is inaudible. The point is the PB-10 basically performed at the same level, if not better, then a subwoofer 4 times the price. They both were measured under the same circumstances, so there's no slanting of data. If anything, its buyers remorse.


SheepStar
What this really shows me is that you don't need a large wad of cash to get good bass in your home theater.

I agree with Sheep! If there are those out there who place a high sticker price on top "just because it has to be good" and don't want to have an open mind to data (even imperfect data), well all I can say is:

Caveat emptor :confused:
 
KC23

KC23

Audioholic
My noobish feeling on it is ... so close in quality the audio brainyacks can have a nice long argument over it ... not so close in price, we will not be having any argument there.

Who wouldn't love that beautiful axiom, but some of us have some real life $ issues, so value has its ... well, value. :)
 
Matt34

Matt34

Moderator
KC23 said:
My noobish feeling on it is ... so close in quality the audio brainyacks can have a nice long argument over it ... not so close in price, we will not be having any argument there.

Who wouldn't love that beautiful axiom, but some of us have some real life $ issues, so value has its ... well, value. :)
Right on......and on an enlisted man's salary the PB-10 is a hands down winner.:D

P.S- should have mine on Monday!!!:p
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top