PSA updates

[Tom V.]

Looks like the PowerX SE edition CEA numbers are getting revised:

Correct. I mentioned a week(?) or so ago (avs thread)we were going to revise our charting as we had 2 new sets of data that were taken in much warmer conditions. The first half dozen or so measurements were done in 60-65 degrees as we were waiting all winter to get outside. The original chart values were based on those averages. The next 2-3 rounds of measurements were done in 84-91 degree weather, bright sun, in blacktop, with amp oriented to the sun. I bet the temperatures near the subs was well >100f. I knew these would be a little lower but it took me a few days to review, compare, pascal, average everything. Then I had to figure out a fair way to combine the "cool" data to the "really hot" data. In the end I went for KISS route. Just a basic average between the cool and hot data. I think max difference over the 36(?) data points was around 2dB. Minimum difference was very small fractions. On average....about 1dB across the board. So I'm guessing our adjustments were around half dB down although I didn't even check that.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio

 

[shadyJ]

As I have said repeatedly, show me the specific data point(s) you don't agree with. Because the links you provide only correlate to me thoughts on the subject. You just don't seem to understand any of issues involved. The above links show deviations of a fraction of a single dB from what I can gather from your rantings here. Please show me the error on our chart? Or is this "error" the fact that two tests, in two different locations, with two different sets of equipment....DID show a deviation <1.0dB? If that is your complaint, I'm sorry but that is normal. You can check with Josh, Brent, anyone that has any experience with GP work.

Your second statement is a complete fabrication/twisting of facts. Please provide the link where I'm stating that the maximum output bursts of CEA-2010 are the ONLY important performance metric when comparing subwoofers? That is *exactly* what you are claiming in your statement. I have never had that POV and certainly haven't posted anything remotely like that. Very typical of your agenda though.

I will let the post I linked to speak for itself instead of just rephrasing the same points which you will inevitably dodge again. As for your protest of using CEA as the sole measurement of subwoofer performance, I will only restate that everytime I mentioned any other metric of subwoofer performance in any of our debates, you accused me of cherry picking data to bash your sub. Anyone can do the most basic of google searches to verify that.

 

[Tom V.]

I will let the post I linked to speak for itself instead of just rephrasing the same points which you will inevitably dodge again. As for your protest of using CEA as the sole measurement of subwoofer performance, I will only restate that everytime I mentioned any other metric of subwoofer performance in any of our debates, you accused me of cherry picking data to bash your sub. Anyone can do the most basic of google searches to verify that.

Okay, so you have no actual complaint about ANY specific data on ANY of our charts. Your entire agenda is simply to try to question our accuracy and integrity with absolutely no evidence to support any of your agenda? Thanks, got it.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio

 

[Steve81]

FWIW, I don't read that as Tom saying CEA2010 is the only thing that matters, just that it takes acceptable THD levels into account. Of course if you want to argue that the CEA limits are too high, that's a different discussion. There you run into the realities of dealing with complex real world content vs pure tones, not to mention real world use generally doesn't have people pushing subwoofers to their limits for much more than a split second where a momentary spike in THD isn't going to be as notable.

 

[Bear123]

We like to think so..

We get so few returns we are considering just offering for free shipping both ways to audition our XS15se and XV15se. If this is well met we'll extend the offer to all products.

Tom V.
Power Sound Audio

Wow, another possible step up in service/value. Nice.

 

[Steve81]

Looks like PSA's numbers are up over at data-bass.

XS15se
XV30Fse

Edit: For comparison purposes, data-bass' numbers put the CEA averages at:

XS15se: 20-31.5Hz: 113.0dB
40-63Hz: 123.4dB

XV30Fse: 20-31.5Hz: 120.1dB
40-63Hz: 127.7dB

averaged in Pa, normalized to 1m, peak.

 

[Basshead81]

Aside from the max burst output, the new driver appears to have greatly improved on long term power, less thd, no inductance, and maintains its response shape well. XS15se looks to be offering the performance of subs that cost significantly more.

 

[Steve81]

XS15se looks to be offering the performance of subs that cost significantly more.

Indeed. The Dynamo 1500X makes an interesting comparison as its a sealed 15" sub w/ comparable amounts of amp power at twice the price.

 

[kini]

Indeed. The Dynamo 1500X makes an interesting comparison as its a sealed 15" sub w/ comparable amounts of amp power at twice the price.

It's twice the price because it's a brick and mortar store sub with all the baggage that comes with that sales channel. It's build is "cheaper" IMO than the PSA. For where the ML competes it's better than most of the other subs in its price range, which was a big surprise to me.

 

[Steve81]

For where the ML competes it's better than most of the other subs in its price range, which was a big surprise to me.

The ML isn't half bad, especially when you consider MSRP vs street price. Overall performance looks pretty competitive with the SB13U and ULS15, which is impressive considering, as you note, that it is a B&M sub (not that I necessarily subscribe to B&M being inherently worse dollar for dollar than ID). I think Josh's main gripe with it was the signal processing to push it into a flat response down deep as opposed to playing to the sealed alignment's natural strengths.